By
Judge Aileen Cannon denied special counsel Jack Smith’s request to keep secret the names of witnesses Donald Trump can’t discuss the case with ahead of trial. Given her previous, dubious rulings in Trump’s favor before he was charged, it’s reasonable to question Cannon’s every move in this case.
But Monday’s denial doesn’t signal Cannon, a Trump appointee, is throwing the classified documents and obstruction case for Trump. Importantly, she denied Smith’s motion “without prejudice” — meaning he can make his case for sealing the witness list again with a more detailed motion.
Remember, when Trump was arraigned earlier this month and pleaded not guilty to violating the Espionage Act and other crimes, the government did not request a no-contact order. Rather, it was imposed by the magistrate judge (not Cannon). Nonetheless, in carrying out the order, Smith’s team doesn’t want to publicize its non-exhaustive list of 84 witnesses.
Yet, in rejecting that request — for now — Cannon said the government didn’t explain why it even had to file the list with the court, what the justification is for sealing the list or why methods other than sealing (like redaction) wouldn’t work. She also faulted the feds for not specifying the duration of the proposed sealing.
Notably, Cannon observed in her order that a media coalition is pushing to publicize the list, citing the First Amendment and related legal principles. (NBCUniversal, MSNBC's parent company, is part of that coalition.) So even if she rejected Smith’s attempt outright, it would have been consistent with the media position. But whether the press pushes for it or not, it’s reasonable to require government justification for keeping information from the public.
How Cannon responds to Smith's next request could be more telling about how she’ll handle the case going forward.
Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Blog newsletter for weekly updates on the top legal stories, including news from the Supreme Court, the Donald Trump investigations and more.