So the 200-word limit is a publicly available standard that is enforced in every courtroom in Judge Cannon’s venue by all judges? If so, then it seems colossally simple to discern whether she is arbitrarily applying it to Jack Smith in this one instance. But if she, and other judges in that district, allow attorneys to submit statements routinely of 250 and 300 words, then it seems to me he’s got some solid basis for her recusal from this case. Combined with other evidence of bias, of course, which she has also supplied.
FBI Search and Seizure at Trump's Mar-A-Lago Residence, August 8, 2022, Case Dismissed July 15, 2024
I’ll note that in general we celebrate when judges get snarky when slapping down various Trump lawyer absurdities.
Also noted: not Skywatcher’s words, it’s from a headline he linked.
It seems to be more nuanced than that as well. From that article linked above:
She construed the government’s notice as a “notice of supplemental authority,” which, she said, is limited by local rules to stay under 200 words.
Now, Smith categorized his Thursday filing as a “notice,” so there’s at least a question here if the local rule that Cannon cites applies here. The notice clocked in at a whopping 237 words
As the evidence against Loose Cannon continues to mount, I’m beginning to anticipate a request (in whatever form it needs to take) to have her removed from the case. If her rejection of Smith’s notice is demonstrably arbitrary and capricious, that may be the last straw. Smith doesn’t seem like the type to put up with this nonsense for long.
Judges reject pleadings all the time if they’re not in strict compliance with the local rules. I’ve seen it in my cases at least 4 times in the last few months. Generally, all you have to do is refile correctly.
So do you feel that this story might be overblown?
Exactly. IME lawyers are loathe to say in 5 words what they can say in 10. Page and word limits are generally set forth perfectly clearly. Exceed them at your peril - or simply seek leave to file an overlong pleading.
The 7th Cir used to be pretty extreme WRT line spacing, proportinate fonts, and page limits. But they wouldn’t have to be as specific if logorrheic lawyers tried to get around them by putting material in single-spaced footnotes, using small fonts, and the like.
I haven’t read the pleading in question, but I haven’t heard anyone who has claim that it was flawless and could not communicate the same with 37 fewer words.
I was once ordered to appear and “show cause” why I should not be disciplined for using smaller than 14 point font. (before word counts there were page limits, and judges were trying to set rules so they couldn’t be manipulated by smaller margins and small fonts)
I did a bit of research and determined that Microsoft Word’s 14 point font was not identical to a printer’s 14 point font, and my font actually did comply with the rules. The judge remarked that I successfully confused him, but that I should never do it again. I prefer the word limits.
Uh … like a boss!
A guy on an a Youtube channel is making a big deal out of “paperless orders” being issued by Cannon. As I understand it (and I could be totally wrong), such orders can’t be appealed to a higher court but still have effect on the proceedings. Is this a red herring or an actual serious issue?
Not sure. Haven’t heard that term before. Most orders by the trial court cannot be appealed until the trial is over. So that’s no big deal. Sometimes court’s issue a “minute entry” in the docket without a formal document called an “order.” Those are usually procedural things, and wouldn’t be appealed (successfully) anyway. Rejecting a pleading because it doesn’t conform to the local rules could just be a minute entry.
My non-lawyer take:
It sounds to me like this is referring to orders issued from the bench orally by the judge. Those rulings happen all the time, far more common that rulings issued in writing. They can happen in open court at any time a motion is made by either party, whether written or orally, during any proceeding. They are often appealable, though if the “erroneous” ruling is made during trial, then the appeal doesn’t happen until after the trial is completed.
If the judge is ruling on a pretrial matter (as is the case here), those rulings can be appealed in some circumstances. Not in others. As @Procrustus points out, if the ruling – made either orally or by the issuance of a minute order – being discussed is the one regarding too many words in the Notice filed by Smith’s team, then that’s not a wise subject for appeal. It’s a local rule and can be easily remedied.
But if Cannon forecloses any opportunity for the prosecution to remedy the error and her subsequent ruling arises out of a complete disregard for the substance of the prosecution’s Notice, then that might be a valid issue for pretrial appeal by the prosecution. It’s immaterial if her ruling was in writing or issued orally from the bench.
IOW, Cannon is totally correct to reject a pleading if it doesn’t conform to local filing rules. She’d be out on a limb if she uses this procedural oversight to ignore everything the prosecution has to say about the issue before the court.
The term, “paperless orders,” sounds like some kind of Sov Cit invocation that translates to, “bunch of bullshit.” Without knowing the specifics of what was being discussed or by whom, it’s hard to say.
I think we have BINGO here:
“The Court heard argument from the parties on Defendants’ pending motions to continue,” Cannon said in a brief paperless minute entry on the docket, signaling that a subsequent order would provide more detail on how coming deadlines will be pushed back. “Pre-trial deadlines temporarily stayed pending order to follow.”
Cannon issued a paperless order torpedoing the SCO for filing a notice of supplemental authority that was too wordy, in violation of Local Rule 7.8.
Judge Cannon not pushing back the trial date, but will extend some dates that occur pre-trial:
Ooh, coin flip.
Will Trump pretend this is a victory and praise Cannon as a brave and brilliant legal mind, hoping that she might end up pushing the trial anyway? Or will he start attacking her like he’s attacking the other traitor judges?
I’m gonna go with he attacks her. The actual trial is the only date that really matters.
Trump’s lawyers got greedy. Earlier, Judge Cannon had strongly hinted she would push this trial date back in part because of Trump’s somewhat conflicting other DC case trial date. After that strong hint, Trump’s lawyers immediately went to DC and filed a Stay/tried pushing the DC trial deadlines back.
I don’t think Judge Cannon liked how blatantly they are trying to use her to their advantage. She kinda pumped the brakes so to speak.
I feel like Trump may be beginning to wear out his welcome. There comes a time in every crime drama TV series where the favor asked is just too much to grant. It would be a beautiful day if we were nearing that point.
I’ve speculated that – if and when any of these cases gets to the SCOTUS – I wouldn’t bet on Trump having the home court advantage that he probably thinks he has.
I think he is counting on them in a different way than most expect. He knows they are going to rule against him. His hope is that they will delay issuing those unavoidable rulings until after the 2024 election.
They’ve done this for him before. Remember when Trump’s IRS guy refused to turn over Trump’s tax returns to the Congressional committee investigating irregularities relating to same? The committee sued Trump’s administration to force compliance. There was no legal question at all. The language is clear: If Congress asks for tax returns, the IRS shall turn them over.
As I recall, the case was handled fairly swiftly through the appellate process. But once it hit SCOTUS, it languished for a year and a half before they issued the inevitable ruling. But by the time they did, the issue was basically moot.
I think this is all Trump hopes for here.
Well said. I still don’t know how he intends to dispatch with NY and GA state charges, but …
ETA: Obviously, those could – in theory – end up before SCOTUS, too.
Oh, who figured Trumps Directed Verdict Motion would fly? Anybody? Bueller???