U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon has ordered the Department of Justice not to release former special counsel Jack Smith's final report on the investigation into classified documents taken by Donald Trump. The ruling, issued this week, revives Cannon's earlier stance that Smith's appointment was invalid. Critics argue the decision lacks jurisdiction and contradicts historical precedent for such reports.
In a recent order, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, overseeing cases in the Southern District of Florida, prohibited the release of Volume II of former special counsel Jack Smith's report. This document details the criminal investigation into boxes of classified materials that former President Donald Trump removed from the White House in 2021. Cannon's decision came in response to a January 20, 2025, motion from Trump's co-defendants, Waltine Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira, requesting a permanent ban on the report's publication.
Cannon reiterated her 2024 ruling that Smith's appointment as special counsel was unlawful, a position no other court has endorsed. She described Smith's preparation of the report as a “brazen stratagem” to circumvent her prior dismissal of the indictment, calling it “a concerning breach of the spirit of the dismissal order.” The judge further contended that releasing the report would undermine fairness and the presumption of innocence, given that no guilt was adjudicated.
However, this stance conflicts with precedent. In 2019, Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian election interference was publicly released despite not resulting in charges against Trump, who was not exonerated. Mueller's investigation highlighted evidence of obstruction, yet Attorney General William Barr, appointed by Trump, made it available with redactions.
The order arrives amid ongoing litigation. Since January 2025, the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University has sought the report's release under the Freedom of Information Act. After Cannon delayed responses, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals compelled her to act in December 2025, leading to an appeal now on an expedited schedule with oral arguments set for June. Scott Wilkens, senior counsel for the institute, stated, “There has been no basis for Judge Cannon to prevent the release of Volume II since, for over a year, we’ve argued that she had no proper basis, no jurisdiction, to enjoin its release once the case fully came to an end.”
Last month, Smith testified before Congress, saying, “Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity,” and affirmed he would prosecute based on the facts regardless of political affiliation. Trump responded on Truth Social, labeling Smith a “deranged animal” and calling for an investigation by Attorney General Pam Bondi.
Cannon's history in the case includes delaying proceedings before dismissing charges in 2024. Rumors suggest Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito may retire this summer, though no direct link to Cannon's ruling is confirmed.
