Clearing Up A Few Things

She hasn't done that at all, which is why the aftermath of this could get really interesting. https://t.co/WK9dpOjDZS

— emptywheel (chex mix) (@emptywheel) July 15, 2024

JMM and ew are fine commenters (among my favorites of people who don’t comment here), but neither of them are lawyers.

First, Cannon didn’t overrule anything. She’s a federal district judge. At best she can overrule a federal magistrate. She can rule against a state court, in certain circumstances, but she certainly can’t overrule case law.

That’s the province of appeals courts. 

All Cannon has done in this opinion is ignore precedent, not overrule it. Her opinion is not binding on anyone except the parties to this case. A federal appellate ruling, by contrast, can be binding on all federal courts and persons in that district. The one excerpt I’ve read from this opinion cited a district court case. When I was in law school, one of the things we learned was that trial court opinions were basically useless, and should only be cited in legal arguments as an absolute last resort. They had precedential value barely above that of dictionaries:

Envision Aileen Cannon with a stack of different dictionaries before her. pic.twitter.com/OyKB3WRSxb

— emptywheel (chex mix) (@emptywheel) July 15, 2024

which can really only be cited for reference, never for legal authority. Case law establishes the definition of legal terms of art, not Black’s or Webster’s.

So Cannon’s opinion is not precedent nor, apparently, founded on precedent. It’s an argument, as ew points out:

Also, she claims there has been little judicial scrutiny of this, ignoring the 4 precedents and Hunter Biden's similar challenge rejected by 2 Trump appointees. https://t.co/RHZ8ggCBuM

— emptywheel (chex mix) (@emptywheel) July 15, 2024

 that even Hunter Biden lost.

Honestly, Cannon's dismissal of the Trump case may REALLY not help him in the way he wants. And it's a nutty opinion, citing a District case and not the Appellate precedents, ignoring the Hur appointment, and more.

But it may free Hunter Biden!

— emptywheel (chex mix) (@emptywheel) July 15, 2024

That’s the point exactly. And no, it won’t free Hunter Biden. Among other nonsense, Cannon apparently thinks Jack Smith, a DOJ employee, is a “private individual.” Clarence Thomas may find that a compelling argument (how?), but I honestly don’t think four more justices will. Trump v US was bad; but it wasn’t THIS bad. 

As I say, district court rulings are not precedent (at best they indicate the course of the law at the trial level), and district courts can’t overrule precedent. This opinion is really just a farce by a judge not fit to sit on the bench. Trump gave us more than his share of such judges. Of course, Poppy Bush gave us the granddaddy of such judges.

What is it about Republicans?