Credited from: HUFFPOST
In a significant development, a federal judge has ruled that the Justice Department can publicly release its investigative report regarding President-elect Donald Trump’s involvement in the 2020 election interference. This ruling marks the latest chapter in a turbulent court dispute over the highly anticipated document, just days before Trump is scheduled to assume office again (AP News). However, a temporary injunction halting the immediate release of the report will remain in effect until Tuesday, and it is expected that this ruling will not conclude the legal wranglings surrounding the case.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who was nominated by Trump, had previously blocked the complete release of the report compiled by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Nevertheless, her most recent decision enables the disclosure of the volume concerning Trump's efforts to overturn the election results, particularly in light of the insurrection that took place at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Cannon has scheduled a hearing for Friday to consider whether lawmakers can access another volume regarding Trump’s alleged possession of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida (VOA News).
Smith submitted his report to Attorney General Merrick Garland just before announcing his resignation, as confirmed in recent court filings. If the ruling stands, it could lead to public insights into Trump's aggressive but ultimately unsuccessful attempts to maintain power in the wake of the 2020 election (LA Times).
In a separate but related matter, Cannon has prohibited the Justice Department from sharing the classified documents volume with congressional officials, citing the ongoing jury deliberation affecting Trump’s co-defendants: Walt Nauta, Trump's valet, and Carlos De Oliveira, the Mar-a-Lago property manager. Their lawyers argue that releasing the report could unjustly influence ongoing legal proceedings against them (SCMP). As Cannon pointed out, releasing Volume II may infringe on the fair trial rights of the implicated defendants and violates the Justice Department’s policy regarding disclosures during active cases.