• OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If she dismisses because it has to be filed in DC…they can just file in DC, get a more favorable judge, and have a great reason for why the court must reject Trump’s inevitable change of venue request.

    Florida was only picked to avoid change-of-venue requests. It’s not like there is nowhere to legally charge this case.

    • Davel23@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      If she dismisses with prejudice that means the case cannot be re-filed. I’m not sure if that’s something she’s able to do in this case, but that would effectively kill the case completely.

      • Blakerboy777@artemis.camp
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can’t dismiss with prejudice because of a simple jurisdictional issue like that. “You should have filed it somewhere else, but now you can’t file it anywhere”. Prejudice means that the case has no merit and saying you should have filed it somewhere else indicates it is possibly meritorious.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Judge Aileen Cannon is asking the Justice Department and Donald Trump co-defendant Walt Nauta to weigh in on the legality of special counsel Jack Smith’s ongoing grand jury activity in Washington, DC, which relates to the obstruction portion of the Mar-a-Lago documents case before her in Florida.

    In an order Monday, Cannon said Nauta’s lawyers “shall address the legal propriety of using an out-of-district grand jury proceeding to continue to investigate and/or to seek post-indictment hearings on matters pertinent to the instant indicted matter in this district” by August 17.

    The special counsel previously told Cannon that “the grand jury in this district [in Florida] and a grand jury in the District of Columbia continued to investigate further obstructive activity,” which resulted in the latest group of criminal charges before her against Trump, Nauta and a third defendant, Mar-a-Lago employee Carlos De Oliveira.

    The Justice Department previously flagged to Cannon the possibility of a conflict of interest because Nauta’s lawyer Stanley Woodward has represented others who are likely to be witnesses against him and Trump at trial.

    Woodward’s representation of Trump IT employee and witness Yuscil Taveras was moved to another lawyer after a recent proceeding before the chief federal judge in Washington, CNN has confirmed.

    Trump now faces 40 felony counts, alleging he illegally retained national defense information and that he concealed documents in violation of witness-tampering laws in the Justice Department’s probe into the materials.


    I’m a bot and I’m open source!