That assumes Trump will reward her efforts. Once she saves him, what’s in it for him?
FBI Search and Seizure at Trump's Mar-A-Lago Residence, August 8, 2022, Case Dismissed July 15, 2024
And, too, let’s not lose sight of the fact that Trump is going to lose in November.
I agree with you on this. And may we both be right!
I’m just going to tack this onto each of the threads for all of Trump’s pending criminal cases:
I’d like our legal experts to chime in on whether a writ of mandamus could now be in play, and if not, at what point of the slow walk does it become absurd even to our “well, this is how we do things” judiciary in higher courts.
I’d also like to point out that I just used the term “writ of mandamus,” which means I’m super smart.
I suppose we could theoretically, someday, reach a limit. We’re nowhere close to a place where an appellate court would tell the trial court how to run its own calendar. I’ve waited over a year for a federal judge to issue an order on a summary judgment motion. If the defendant isn’t screaming for a “speedy” trial, a Federal District Court can easily take many years before anyone would care.
Got it. Depressing…thanks for the info.
A current synopsis of where the Mandamus issue might stand, along with a couple of legal scholars’ opinions about whether … it’s time.
Spoiler alert: there is some academic support for taking that step.
Could some of you legal-talking types explain to the rest of us what the relevance would be of a writ of mandamus, here, and how it would work?
I would just like to point out that the Slate article proves my super-smartness. Our attorneys may now step in to answer any questions and I’ll correct them as necessary.
IANAL. Most of what I know, I learned from reading @Stratocaster 's posts 
I think the Cornell article (linked to in the Slate article) boils it down well:
I think you’re going over your contact’s head (in this case, Judge Aileen Cannon), to her bosses (in this case, the 11th Circuit Circuit Court of Appeals, and saying – in effect – Cannon isn’t getting it done and we’ve exhausted all reasonable remedies to push her to do her (damned) job.
You’re asking the 11th to direct Cannon to get off the dime, rule on the outstanding Motions, and get this case moving.
Stupid Discourse.
A Writ is possible, but it’s a huge long shot. Federal judges simply get to control their own docket. Trump will be tried someday, and Smith’s desire that he be tried before the election is not the kind of thing the appellate court would consider. I’d love to be wrong.
I expect the courts explicitly are not supposed to operate with that consideration. They should not be attempting to influence the election one way or the other, even though it’s probable that he’d evade justice by getting elected.
As much as it pisses me off, and I’m not convinced that Cannon isn’t dragging her feet intentionally because of the election. I think she’s a disgrace.
I know this word has gotten quite a workout in recent years, but don’t the unprecedented aspects of this case make the writ more compelling? He’ll possibly be the next president, for Pete’s sake. Doesn’t the public interest in this never-before situation ratchet up the need for the writ to be entertained?
To be clear, Smith can never say this explicitly. It would be super wrong/political. All Smith can say, is the public has a (vague) interest in a speedy trial. We all read into what that means. He can’t, and should not, say why - at least not anything about the election and that Trump might get elected and have his own case dismissed, etc.
As long as it’s not intentionally taking too long**, the election has no bearing on how fast this should go. Legally speaking. Of course it does in the real world.
**Cannon is a shitty Judge and there may be a point where the cumulative effect is overwhelming and blinding. But not, yet.
Loose Cannon is nowhere near this point, but isn’t there
SOME judicial oversight? Not only in cases such as fraud, but if a judge simply isn’t moving their docket?
I never really dealt with it, but ISTR some judges and Magistrate Judges referring to someone keeping track of how their docket was moving, as one reason not to allow excessive delay.
“Justice delayed is justice denied”. As in Magna Carta: “To no one will we sell, to no one will we deny or delay right or justice .”
Whether and how that applies here…
I don’t think the legit public interest is speculation that Trump may get elected and make his Federal woes disappear, as reasonable as that speculation would be.
The legal question hanging in the air is, did a nominee for president egregiously abuse his presidential authority? I can’t think of a more compelling reason for a trial before the election, one vital to the public’s interest. The outcome of such a speedy trial could exonerate Trump. Or not. The issue is not the need to push the outcome in a particular direction. The issue is that it’s unresolved.
This is a singular situation, and I think a reasonable argument can be made specific to the election. The trials are about the abuse of presidential powers, for Pete’s sake. This would not be gaming the system for base political reasons, IMO. I don’t see the need to keep to vague generalities.
I would just qualify that by saying that the appellate judges are not the bosses of the District Court judges.
The District Court judges are independent of the appellate courts. They’re subject to review by the appellate courts, but it’s not like bosses in a company.