In a court filing on March 9, the former president Donald Trump claimed that special counsel Jack Smith had admitted something about how he was chosen to serve as a special prosecutor in the case involving the sensitive information.
The special counsel rejected arguments from President Trump's lawyers and other parties in a court filing last week, stating that he was legitimately nominated to his post by Attorney General Merrick Garland. The attorneys general, they said, had broken the Appropriations Clause of the Constitution, which mandates that Congress, not certain federal agencies, appoints federal officials first.
In the document that Mr. Smith and his group sent to U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, they said that "the Attorney General has the statutory authority to appoint a Special Prosecutor." Precedent "establishes that the Attorney General has statutory authority to appoint the Special Counsel," they stated after citing Section 533 as confirmation that "the Attorney General may appoint officials... to detect and prosecute crimes against the United States."
In the brief, the prosecutors said that the defendant is not a member of the standard Department of Justice "chain of command" and that, although being "subject to Attorney General direction and supervision," he "retains a substantial degree of independent decision making."
The complaint relates to criminal charges that the 45th president unlawfully maintained sensitive papers at his Mar-a-Lago home after his departure from the White House. In response to the accusations, he has pled not guilty.
"While Crooked Joe Biden and his Cronies have claimed from the outset they have nothing to do with Jack Smith's Election Interference case against me," President Trump wrote on Truth Social over the weekend. "Smith himself admitted in a Court Filing yesterday that he'remains subject to Attorney General direction and supervision,' and that includes Biden."
Garland is thus following out his boss's instructions to prosecute me and meddle in the 2024 election, despite his denials to the contrary. Never before has a sitting president so flagrantly used his office's authority to target a political rival during an election year.
The biggest threat to democracy in our nation's history is this one! The absurd and democracy-destroying prosecutions should end, according to Joe Biden.
Both Mr. Garland and representatives of the Biden administration have refuted claims that they are ordering Mr. Smith to go against President Trump in a political capacity. Along with stating that Mr. Smith had a "commitment to both independence and accountability" regarding the cases, Mr. Garland also claimed to have the right to name special counsel in the matter.
President Trump made this statement after Judge Cannon's decision to allow the filing of two amicus papers in favor of the president's positions in the case. Edwin Meese, a former U.S. attorney general, filed one, claiming that Mr. Smith was improperly appointed by Mr. Garland and that the lawsuit ought to be dropped.
Two law professors and the attorney general from the Reagan administration said that Mr. Smith was improperly appointed as a federal official and so had "no authority to prosecute" the case. In their letter, they said that the president and heads of federal agencies are not authorized under the Constitution to "appoint whatever officers they deem appropriate" or to establish new positions; only Congress has the authority to do so.
Smith does not fit those requirements, and neither does the Special Counsel role he allegedly holds. They went on, "He is unaccountable to anybody and has immense authority. "Regardless of one's opinions towards the former President Trump or the actions Smith contests in the main case, that poses a significant threat to the rule of law."
The special counsel rejected arguments from President Trump's lawyers and other parties in a court filing last week, stating that he was legitimately nominated to his post by Attorney General Merrick Garland. The attorneys general, they said, had broken the Appropriations Clause of the Constitution, which mandates that Congress, not certain federal agencies, appoints federal officials first.
In the document that Mr. Smith and his group sent to U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, they said that "the Attorney General has the statutory authority to appoint a Special Prosecutor." Precedent "establishes that the Attorney General has statutory authority to appoint the Special Counsel," they stated after citing Section 533 as confirmation that "the Attorney General may appoint officials... to detect and prosecute crimes against the United States."
In the brief, the prosecutors said that the defendant is not a member of the standard Department of Justice "chain of command" and that, although being "subject to Attorney General direction and supervision," he "retains a substantial degree of independent decision making."
The complaint relates to criminal charges that the 45th president unlawfully maintained sensitive papers at his Mar-a-Lago home after his departure from the White House. In response to the accusations, he has pled not guilty.
"While Crooked Joe Biden and his Cronies have claimed from the outset they have nothing to do with Jack Smith's Election Interference case against me," President Trump wrote on Truth Social over the weekend. "Smith himself admitted in a Court Filing yesterday that he'remains subject to Attorney General direction and supervision,' and that includes Biden."
Garland is thus following out his boss's instructions to prosecute me and meddle in the 2024 election, despite his denials to the contrary. Never before has a sitting president so flagrantly used his office's authority to target a political rival during an election year.
The biggest threat to democracy in our nation's history is this one! The absurd and democracy-destroying prosecutions should end, according to Joe Biden.
Both Mr. Garland and representatives of the Biden administration have refuted claims that they are ordering Mr. Smith to go against President Trump in a political capacity. Along with stating that Mr. Smith had a "commitment to both independence and accountability" regarding the cases, Mr. Garland also claimed to have the right to name special counsel in the matter.
President Trump made this statement after Judge Cannon's decision to allow the filing of two amicus papers in favor of the president's positions in the case. Edwin Meese, a former U.S. attorney general, filed one, claiming that Mr. Smith was improperly appointed by Mr. Garland and that the lawsuit ought to be dropped.
Two law professors and the attorney general from the Reagan administration said that Mr. Smith was improperly appointed as a federal official and so had "no authority to prosecute" the case. In their letter, they said that the president and heads of federal agencies are not authorized under the Constitution to "appoint whatever officers they deem appropriate" or to establish new positions; only Congress has the authority to do so.
Smith does not fit those requirements, and neither does the Special Counsel role he allegedly holds. They went on, "He is unaccountable to anybody and has immense authority. "Regardless of one's opinions towards the former President Trump or the actions Smith contests in the main case, that poses a significant threat to the rule of law."
