Trump Scores Win as Hearing on Jack Smith’s Secret Mar-a-Lago Report Is Delayed Indefinitely

The ruling on Wednesday by the 11th United States Appeals Circuit delaying a hearing on the fate of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s “permanently blocked” Mar-a-Lago report is a setback for those hoping the report reaches the public before next month’s midterm election.Mr. Trump had requested a delay in the hearing over the dossier, which was scheduled for November 2, 2026. The president cited his “extensive commitments, including travel and other obligations in advance of the November 3, 2026, federal midterm elections.” Mr. Trump’s lawyers argued that their client’s packed schedule means they have not had time to confer.The New York Sun was the first to report on the effort — now unsuccessful— by the Knight Institute to ward off the delay that has now been ordered. If the November 2 date had been kept, it would have been possible for the 11th Circuit to order the release of the dossier before November’s election. Knight claims the report is a “document of singular public importance that has been withheld from the public since January 2025.” A separate argument for delay was made by Mr. Trump’s co-defendants, the valet Waltine Nauta and the property manager Carlos De Oliveira, in the criminal case brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Their attorneys noted simply that they “have independent, pre-existing conflicts with the newly scheduled date.” The push to publish the report is being led by a liberal legal group, the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.Senate Democrats have also pushed the cause of release in the form of an amicus brief to the 11th Circuit arguing that Mr. Smith’s Mar-a-Lago case, which many took to be the strongest of the four criminal ones that were levied against Mr. Trump, was an event of “extraordinary public importance.” The brief, authored by the lawyer Norman Eisen, contends that release would be harmless because “there is no jury pool to taint, no pending suppression motion to affect, and no upcoming trial.” Publication is opposed by the case’s erstwhile defendants as well as the Department of Justice. In February, Judge Aileen Cannon of South Florida “permanently blocked” the dispatch from being released to the public. She demurred, though, from acceding to then-Attorney General Pam Bondi’s request that the report be “consigned to the dustbin of history.”That call for annihilation was echoed by Messrs. Trump, Nauta, and De Oliveira, who asked Judge Cannon — a 2020 appointee of the president — to order “constitutional expungement.” If Judge Cannon had acceded to that request, it could have obliterated the possibility for further appellate review by the 11th Circuit, which oversees her. Mr. Smith’s report was mandated by the special counsel regulations, which dictate that the prosecutor “shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached.”Those same regulations assign to the attorney general the discretion to release the report if it “would be in the public interest.” Attorney General Merrick Garland released Mr. Smith’s January 6, 2021, report immediately. In that summary, the special counsel represented that he would have convicted Mr. Trump “but for” the results of the 2024 election. As soon as Mr. Trump regained the White House, he assumed the cloak of “categorical” immunity.Even Mr. Garland, though, evinced hesitation about releasing the Mar-a-Lago dispatch because Messrs. De Oliveira and Nauta, unlike Mr. Trump, possess no constitutional shield against prosecution. Mr. Garland’s solution was to advocate for the release of the report to a handful of congressional leaders and to order them to keep its contents secret. Mr. Garland reasoned that since the case against Mr. Trump’s two aides was dismissed, there would be no injury to their due process rights.Judge Cannon disagreed. She accused Mr. Smith of a “brazen stratagem” of conniving to complete his report even after she disqualified him, a decision that came in the summer of 2024. She also reckoned that such a report had never been released after charges had been filed but in the absence of a trial. Judge Cannon ruled that even though the case is now over, the due process concerns of its defendants have not expired.Judge Cannon called Mr. Smith’s persistence “a concerning breach of the spirit of the Dismissal Order” and mused that it could even amount to “an outright violation of it.” An undoubted violation of that order came in May, when a former Justice Department prosecutor, Carmen Mercedes Lineberger, was charged with illegally emailing herself copies of the report disguised as files with the name “Bundt Cake Recipe” and “Chocolate Cake Recipe.”

Trump Scores Win as Hearing on Jack Smith’s Secret Mar-a-Lago Report Is Delayed Indefinitely

Trump Scores Win as Hearing on Jack Smith’s Secret Mar-a-Lago Report Is Delayed Indefinitely

More from the New York Sun

A Senseless Austen Adaptation

Microsoft Decries Trump-Vance Crackdown on High-Tech Visas

The Nidal Hasan Execution

Don’t Count the GOP Out Yet

Mamdani Puts a Smile on DSA Civil War as Rift Grows

The Dark Horses Expected To Enter the Race for UN Secretary General

Talarico Breaks Fundraising Record With Largest-Ever Third-Quarter Haul, Raking in $64 Million

Phone, Computers, Passport Among Items Taken in Ilhan Omar Raid as List of Subpoenas Grows

More from the New York Sun

A Senseless Austen Adaptation

Microsoft Decries Trump-Vance Crackdown on High-Tech Visas

The Nidal Hasan Execution

Don’t Count the GOP Out Yet

Mamdani Puts a Smile on DSA Civil War as Rift Grows

The Dark Horses Expected To Enter the Race for UN Secretary General

Talarico Breaks Fundraising Record With Largest-Ever Third-Quarter Haul, Raking in $64 Million

Phone, Computers, Passport Among Items Taken in Ilhan Omar Raid as List of Subpoenas Grows