Home high profile ‘Randomly assigned to me’ — ‘period’: Annoyed Mar-a-Lago judge defends herself, sees no reason to exit Trump assassination attempt suspect’s case

‘Randomly assigned to me’ — ‘period’: Annoyed Mar-a-Lago judge defends herself, sees no reason to exit Trump assassination attempt suspect’s case

‘Randomly assigned to me’ — ‘period’: Annoyed Mar-a-Lago judge defends herself, sees no reason to exit Trump assassination attempt suspect’s case

The Donald Trump-appointed federal judge who tossed out the former president’s Mar-a-Lago classified documents prosecution and reportedly burnished her perceived credentials as a candidate for U.S. attorney general, if Trump wins the 2024 election, defended herself and her rulings on Tuesday while declining to step aside from presiding over the attempted Trump assassination case against Ryan Routh.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon completely rejected Routh’s recusal demand after walking through his arguments one by one, appearing to be annoyed at one point that she had to the say the Trump-related cases have been assigned to her randomly.

How we got here

Ryan Routh, a detained 58-year-old convicted felon, was arrested in Florida in mid-September after a Secret Service agent allegedly spotted him with a rifle “in the exterior brush along the fence line near the 6th hole putting green” at the Trump International Golf Club as the former president golfed one hole behind. Authorities have said that the agent opened fire, leading Routh to flee the scene in a Nissan Xterra.

After he was caught, the feds said they found a letter addressed to the “world” stating that “[t]his was an assassination attempt on Donald Trump but I am so sorry I failed you.” Investigators also said that Routh ” rel=”noopener” target=”_blank”>had been camped out for some 12 hours apparently waiting for Trump to golf.

Later in September, Cannon was assigned the case.

What happened next

In mid-October, Routh’s team of public defenders for the first time demanded that Cannon recuse herself from the case, arguing that her appointment by Trump, her dismissal of the Mar-a-Lago case, Trump’s repeated praise of her as “brilliant” in public, and the “prospect” of a potential “promotion” to the U.S. Supreme Court all raised questions about whether she could be impartial in the attempted assassination case given her “relationship to the alleged victim.”

See also  Rudy Giuliani ‘brazenly violating’ court order by repeating ‘exact same lies’ about Georgia election workers that cost him $148 million, attorneys say

Days later, prosecutors in the Southern District of Florida responded by backing Cannon, saying that Routh had cited no authority requiring her recusal and offered little more than speculation without a “sufficient legal or factual basis[.]”

Later on that day, ABC News reported that a Trump campaign “Transition Planning: Legal Principals” document listed Cannon second to former SEC Chairman Jay Clayton on a list of potential AGs.

The next morning, Routh’s lawyers reiterated their recusal demand and cited the ABC report [bolding ours]:

The defense also claimed that prosecutors only recently disclosed, albeit not in a public filing, that Cannon is a high school classmate of a member of the prosecution team and that she years later was a guest at his wedding:

From there, Routh’s lawyers — based on what “some” have said — questioned whether the attempted assassination case had actually been randomly assigned to Cannon.

“[G]iven the low odds of this Court being assigned three cases involving Mr. Trump, some have questioned whether the cases have been assigned at random,” the defense said.

The defense additionally said Cannon, at the time a prosecutor, was a guest at the wedding nearly a decade ago of one of the assigned Routh prosecutors.

One day after Routh’s latest reply, Trump during a radio interview again praised Cannon as “brilliant” and “brave” and said he would fire Jack Smith “within two seconds” if he wins the 2024 election.

How Cannon responded

The judge on Tuesday said flatly that none of the “factors” Routh mentioned requires her to step aside.

“Defendant cites a series of factors which he believes, when viewed in their totality, create an appearance of partiality,” Cannon wrote. “None warrants recusal, whether examined individually or together.”

See also  ‘I’m proud of it’: Woman who ‘f—ing stormed’ the Capitol on Jan. 6 is going to prison

After noting the fact that Trump appointed her does not by itself mean she needs to recuse herself (see: Trump v. Clinton), Cannon said she has “no control” over what Trump says about her, that she has “no ‘relationship to the alleged victim’ in any reasonable sense of the phrase” (since she’s never met him or spoken with him, “except in connection with his required presence at an official judicial proceeding, through counsel,” that the “prospect of a judicial promotion” is wholly “speculative,” and that the Routh case was definitely assigned to her randomly.

“As Defendant acknowledges, I have no control over what private citizens, members of the media, or public officials or candidates elect to say about me or my judicial rulings,” Cannon wrote. “Nor am I concerned about the political consequences of my rulings or how those rulings might be viewed by ‘some in the media.’”

“I follow my oath to administer justice faithfully and impartially, in accordance with the Constitution and the laws of this country,” she added.

Cannon appeared particularly annoyed by having to swat down “media rumors” about how the case was assigned.

“This case, like the prior cited cases involving former President Trump, were randomly assigned to me through the Clerk’s random case assignment system. Period,” Cannon said, with emphasis. “I will not be guided by highly inaccurate, uninformed, or speculative opinions to the contrary.”

She also called it “a strained assumption to begin with” that the Routh case “can even be said to qualify as a ‘same or related’ case as compared to the cited cases involving former President Trump” — that is, the Mar-a-Lago criminal case she dismissed and the Mar-a-Lago civil case that saw her special master regime overturned by the 11th Circuit.

See also  ‘Whose House? Our House!’ SCOTUS swats away demand from Jan. 6 rioter to reverse conviction over ‘demonstrating’ inside Capitol

“I see no valid basis for recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455 or the Due Process Clause,” Cannon concluded. “The Motion is accordingly DENIED.”

Read Cannon’s denial here.

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Note: Thank you for visiting our website! We strive to keep you informed with the latest updates based on expected timelines, although please note that we are not affiliated with any official bodies. Our team is committed to ensuring accuracy and transparency in our reporting, verifying all information before publication. We aim to bring you reliable news, and if you have any questions or concerns about our content, feel free to reach out to us via email. We appreciate your trust and support!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.