A Trump-appointed judge in Florida has permanently blocked the release of a key report from Special Counsel Jack Smith detailing his investigation into Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents and alleged obstruction of justice. The ruling, issued Monday by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, marks a significant victory for the former president in his efforts to keep the findings sealed from public view.
Judge Cannon granted requests from Trump and two former co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira, prohibiting the Justice Department from releasing the second volume of Smith’s report. The order extends to Attorney General Pam Bondi, or any successor, preventing them from sharing the report’s contents. Bondi had previously determined the report’s second volume shouldn’t be made public, citing concerns about the legality of Smith’s appointment as special counsel.
The decision comes after Cannon dismissed the charges against Trump in July 2024, ruling that Smith was unlawfully appointed. Smith appealed that decision, but the case concluded following Trump’s re-election to the White House. “Special Counsel Smith, acting without lawful authority, obtained an indictment in this action and initiated proceedings that resulted in a final order of dismissal of all charges,” Cannon wrote in her ruling. “the former defendants in this case, like any other defendant in this situation, still enjoy the presumption of innocence held sacrosanct in our constitutional order.”
Cannon argued that releasing the report now would be inappropriate given the dismissal of the case and the presumption of innocence afforded to the defendants. “For obvious reasons, the Court need not take actions in contravention of that protection absent a statutory or other lawful directive to do so,” she stated. The second volume of the report contains “voluminous discovery” that remains subject to a protective order issued during the early stages of the case, further complicating its release.
The judge also criticized Smith for preparing the report in the first place, suggesting it overstepped the bounds of his authority after her earlier rulings effectively ended his office’s work on the classified documents matter. “The Court need not countenance this brazen stratagem or effectively perpetuate the Special Counsel’s breach of this Court’s own order,” Cannon wrote.
While Cannon blocked the release of the report, she declined a request from Trump’s former co-defendants to order its destruction. The future of the report’s availability remains uncertain, as transparency groups continue to challenge the decision through appeals. These groups argue for public access to the findings, citing the importance of accountability and transparency in matters of public interest.
The first volume of Smith’s report, which focused on Trump’s alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, was released before Trump returned to office. However, the second volume, dealing directly with the classified documents case, has remained under seal due to the legal challenges initiated by Trump and his associates. The legal battle over the report underscores the ongoing tensions surrounding the investigation and the former president’s attempts to control the narrative surrounding his actions.
The ruling is likely to fuel further debate about the role of special counsels and the balance between executive power and public accountability. Transparency advocates will likely continue to press for the release of the report, arguing that the public has a right to know the full extent of Smith’s findings. The case highlights the complex legal and political landscape surrounding the investigations into Donald Trump, even after his return to the White House.
