The Briefing Room
General Category => Trump Legal Investigations => Topic started by: rangerrebew on January 04, 2024, 06:09:51 pm
-
Appeals Court to Consider Constitutionality of Jack Smith’s Appointment
BRADLEY JAYE3 Jan 2024872
5:10
Jack Smith’s appointment as special counsel might be in trouble.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit advised counsels in Smith’s criminal case against Trump to be prepared during previously scheduled January 9 oral arguments to address issues raised in briefs filed by amicus curiae.
The court made the announcement after an explosive amicus brief filed by attorneys for former Attorney General Ed Meese arguing that Jack Smith’s appointment as special counsel by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland is unconstitutional and so the court must reject his prosecution against Trump.
Meese, joined by Steven Calabresi, the co-chairman of the Federalist Society, and Gary Lawson, a prominent constitutional law professor, argues essentially that Garland improperly appointed Smith to an office that does not exist with authority Garland does not possess.
Trump shared a Breitbart News article on the brief, firing off on Smith’s appointment on Truth Social.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/01/03/appeals-court-consider-constitutionality-jack-smith-appointment/
-
Ed Meese and the Federalist Society doing what Trump's own lawyers won't do.
-
I read the brief, and they make a pretty strong argument. What Garland should have done was take a US attorney who was already confirmed, and assign him to this case. That's essentially what Trump did with Durham. Garland pretty much just picked Smith out of thin air and gave him these powers. I think there's a better than even shot that Smith's appointment ultimately is stricken.