OPINION:
Another plot to remove former President Donald Trump was foiled Monday. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon ruled Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of Jack Smith to criminally prosecute the opposition party candidate was an unlawful act.
Arresting a political opponent, imprisoning his advisers and sending an armed SWAT team to invade his home are forceful intrusions on the electoral process. That these actions are executed by people with badges does not alter their violent nature.
In two of the four cases the White House devised to take down Mr. Trump, the badge being flashed was fraudulent.
Mr. Garland thought he could appoint anyone he pleased as special counsel to do his dirty work. He handed Mr. Smith an unbounded budget and sweeping prosecutorial powers beyond even those of U.S. attorneys who, under our Constitution, can take office only after being confirmed by a majority of senators.
A prior statute authorizing the appointment of special or independent counsels was erased from the books 25 years ago, and Mr. Smith was not confirmed by the Senate. “The Court is convinced Special Counsel’s Smith’s prosecution of this action breaches two structural cornerstones of our constitutional scheme — the role of Congress in the appointment of constitutional officers, and the role of Congress in authorizing expenditures by law,” Judge Cannon wrote in her 93-page ruling.
Judge Cannon closed Mr. Smith’s classified documents case, saying she “could not rewrite history” by pretending his 18-month investigation and prosecution of Mr. Trump was conducted in a constitutional manner.
The bad news for the administration does not stop there. While Judge Cannon says her ruling is limited to the Florida documents case, the principles she cites are universal. Her honor picked up on the not-so-subtle hints dropped by Supreme Court justices who have grown weary of Mr. Smith’s antics.
In 2016, the high court unanimously rejected Mr. Smith’s overzealous and political prosecution of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, a Republican, on the grounds that Mr. Smith’s “boundless interpretation” of what constitutes an official act could not stand. Not surprisingly, the high court in July blasted the faux special counsel once more about his abuse of the phrase in the case he brought against Mr. Trump in the District.
With respect to core functions of the presidency, the justices concluded no court or prosecutor can ever second-guess a president’s official actions. This is obvious. If a president had to answer for his official decisions to any of the country’s thousands of ambitious local and federal prosecutors, then prosecutors would have the power to manipulate and hobble the president through litigation. That is not our system of government.
In rejecting this outcome, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote separately to refer to Mr. Smith as the “private citizen” whom Mr. Garland “purported to appoint” as special counsel, providing a road map for Monday’s decision.
The D.C. case against Mr. Trump is technically still alive, but Judge Tanya Chutkan is going to have a hard time proceeding against the higher court’s instruction.
Despite spending well over $25 million in his attempt to bring down President Biden’s election rival, the former special counsel could muster only flimsy charges that require statutes to be twisted into pretzels to succeed.
Mr. Smith wasted no time in announcing an appeal, but it is doomed. The high court has made clear it won’t tolerate Mr. Smith’s style of playing fast and loose with the law.
His plot is foiled, and Mr. Trump stands tall.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.