Fort Pierce, Florida — A Federal judge in Florida denied a motion by former President Donald Trump to dismiss a case concerning his handling of classified documents. The motion argued that the statute under which Trump was charged, the Espionage Act, was unconstitutionally vague. However, Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that this matter would be better addressed during a trial, leaving open the possibility of addressing concerns related to the Espionage Act in connection with jury instructions. You can read the decision HERE:

Docket # 23-cr-80101-AMC-1 – United States v. Donald J. Trump – Document # 402 – Order Denying Without Prejudice Defendant Trump’s Motion to Dismiss 3-14-2023

Trump’s legal team contended that there were unresolved legal questions regarding the Espionage Act’s application. They argued that these uncertainties amounted to unconstitutional vagueness. Prosecutors rebutted this, asserting that the statute’s prohibitions were clear, specifically citing Trump’s unauthorized possession and retention of national defense information.

During the hearing, Judge Cannon expressed concern about the premature nature of the discussion regarding the Espionage Act and emphasized the extraordinary nature of declaring a statute unconstitutionally vague. There was also scrutiny over the timeline of Trump’s possession of the documents and whether they were deemed personal records before he left office.

Additionally, arguments were presented regarding Trump’s assertion of presidential immunity under the Presidential Records Act, which shields him from prosecution over recordkeeping. His team argued that as president, he had the discretion to designate documents as personal, thereby precluding judicial review. However, prosecutors countered that the records in question were presidential, not personal, and belonged to the government.

Prosecutors further argued that Trump knowingly retained classified documents, highlighting comments he made regarding Hillary Clinton’s email controversy. They emphasized that Trump’s actions were illegal, regardless of his claims about presidential discretion under the Presidential Records Act.

The case involves 32 counts of unlawfully retaining classified government records and allegations of obstruction of investigations. Trump and his co-defendants have pleaded not guilty.

In summary, the court denied Trump’s motion to dismiss the case, indicating that legal questions surrounding the Espionage Act and presidential immunity would be addressed during the trial proceedings. The case remains ongoing, with the trial schedule yet to be determined.

The case is United States of America v. Donald J. Trump, Docket # 9:23-cr-80101-AMC-1. The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida before the Honorable Aileen M. Cannon.