Trump's judge came through for him

A nice dleay, and if Trump loses, he can then appeal to the Supreme Court.

If nothing else, all this delays the proceedings.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE:

Hey, she may be on the District Court, but she was put there by Donald Trump (and a bunch of fool Senators) when she is barely 40 years old.  What do you want on District courts?  Judges with proven records?  Experience?  Knowledge of the law?  Christ, you people are demanding.

UPDATE:

UPDATE:

Judge Cannon took several steps that specialists said were vulnerable to being overturned if the government files an appeal, as most agreed was likely. Any appeal would be heard by the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta, where Mr. Trump appointed six of its 11 active judges.

[...]

“Judge Cannon had a reasonable path she could have taken — to appoint a special master to review documents for attorney-client privilege and allow the criminal investigation to continue otherwise,” said Ryan Goodman, a New York University law professor. “Instead, she chose a radical path.”

[...]

“The opinion seems oblivious to the nature of executive privilege,” he said.

The Justice Department is itself part of the executive branch, and a court has never held that a former president can invoke the privilege to keep records from his time in office away from the executive branch itself.

[...]

Paul Rosenzweig, a former homeland security official in the George W. Bush administration and prosecutor in the independent counsel investigation of Bill Clinton, said it was egregious to block the Justice Department from steps like asking witnesses about government files, many marked as classified, that agents had already reviewed.

“This would seem to me to be a genuinely unprecedented decision by a judge,” Mr. Rosenzweig said. “Enjoining the ongoing criminal investigation is simply untenable.”

[...]

“Even if any assertion of executive privilege by plaintiff ultimately fails in this context,” she wrote, “that possibility, even if likely, does not negate a former president’s ability to raise the privilege as an initial matter.”

She did not address a 1974 Supreme Court case that upheld the Watergate prosecutor’s demand for White House tapes as part of a criminal investigation despite the attempt by Mr. Nixon, then the sitting president, to block it by asserting executive privilege.

“Even if there is some hypothetical situation in which a former president could shield his or her communications from the current executive branch,” Mr. Shane said, “they would not be able to do so in the context of a criminal investigation — and certainly not after the material has been seized pursuant to a lawful search warrant.”

[...]

In her Senate questionnaire, she described herself as having been a member of the conservative Federalist Society since 2005. Mr. Trump nominated her in May 2020, and the Senate confirmed her on Nov. 12, nine days after he lost re-election.

[...]

Judge Cannon allowed a separate review of the documents, by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, to continue. It is assessing the risk to national security that the insecure holding of sensitive documents at Mar-Lago may have caused.

David Alan Sklansky, a Stanford University law professor, said he was glad that work had been allowed to continue given its importance. But he said there was an inherent contradiction in allowing the executive branch to use the files for that purpose while blocking it from using them for an active criminal investigation.

[...]

While Mr. Trump does not own the government documents he repeatedly failed to return, the warrant permitted the F.B.I. to take anything else of his that he had left in the same containers as evidence of how he stored sensitive information.

Judge Cannon noted that a department report said this had included “medical documents, correspondence related to taxes and accounting information.”

  NYT

So that's why he's so desperate to get them back.

A footnote insinuated that the Justice Department might leak those files to reporters.

I think that would be far less likely than the Department starting another criminal investigation (or adding the evidence to an already possibly existing one).

“To any lawyer with serious federal criminal court experience who is being honest, this ruling is laughably bad, and the written justification is even flimsier,” [Samuel W. Buell, a Duke University law professor,] wrote in an email. “Donald Trump is getting something no one else ever gets in federal court, he’s getting it for no good reason, and it will not in the slightest reduce the ongoing howls that he is being persecuted, when [in fact] he is being privileged.”

UPDATE:

It most certainly is, Ollie.

UPDATE:  Follow-up questions

UPDATE 9/8:

UPDATE 9/10: