驳回前总统唐纳德·特朗普的法官机密文件案特朗普的前共同被告的律师周三下午告诉一家联邦上诉法院，应该对特别顾问杰克·史密斯关于此案的最终报告的发布有最终发言权。
律师要求第十一巡回上诉法院将他们的决定推迟到美国地区法官Aileen Cannon，他可以就是否公布该报告举行听证会。
“这反映了一种不正当的企图，即取消地方法院监督和控制与它主持的刑事审判有关的信息流的责任，并将这一角色置于检察机关的手中——与初审法院不同，检察机关在推进自己的有罪叙事方面有既得利益，”特朗普助手Walt Nauta和工作人员Carlos De Oliveria的律师辩称。
这些争论发生在卡农事件的第二天暂时封锁发布史密斯的最终报告是为了防止“不可挽回的伤害”，而此事正在由第十一巡回法庭审议。
周三早些时候，美国司法部长办公室的律师在一份文件中说，司法部长梅里克·加兰不打算公开发布报告中与机密文件案件有关的部分，但该卷将提供给众议院和参议院司法委员会的高级成员和主席。
辩护律师在下午提交的文件中称，向众议院和参议院司法委员会的主席和高级成员有限披露完整报告将因可能的泄露而危及案件，称此次起诉为“政治案件”。
“政治媒体的运作依赖于泄密，如果这种泄密发生在这里，正当程序权利受到威胁的被告将没有追索权，”文件称。“对泄露的担忧不容忽视;国会是一个政治机构;其个别成员有政治目的;这是一个政治案件。”
尽管辩护律师在他们的文件中承认了与报告相关的政治因素，但他们指责检察官在报告发布的时间上制造了“虚假的紧迫性”。
“本案中唯一声称紧急的律师是司法部长，但政府的辩护律师没有解释这种紧迫性，”律师们在距离特朗普就职不到两周的文件中写道。“总检察长是一个职位，而不是个人:它将永远存在下去。政治活动的紧迫性是一种虚假的紧迫性。”
检察官在他们的文件中还指控加兰打算公开发布报告中与他有关的部分联邦选举干预案反对特朗普。
他们在文件中称，加兰拥有发布报告的“固有”权力，他们要求第十一巡回法庭撤销坎农法官的命令，并拒绝特朗普的前共同被告诺塔和德奥利维拉阻止发布报告的请求。
检察官认为，由于史密斯已经将他的报告转交给了加兰，特朗普的前共同被告关于史密斯任命合法性的论点是“没有意义的”。
“司法部长是司法部经参议院确认的首长，有权监督司法部的所有官员和雇员。因此，总检察长有权决定是否公布他的下属准备的调查报告，”检察官在他们的文件中说。
“这一权力属于总检察长办公室;这不取决于任命特别顾问作为美国下级官员采取行动的合法性，也不取决于国务院授权司法部长批准公开发布特别顾问报告的具体规定，”文件称。
虽然辩护律师曾试图阻止发布与机密文件案有关的报告第二卷，而不是涵盖特朗普的第一卷选举干预案-坎农法官的命令只提到“最终报告”，而不是其中的两卷，这表明整个报告被阻止发布。
检察官要求上诉法院“明确表示，司法部长允许国会如上所述对第二卷进行有限审查并公开发布第一卷，没有任何障碍。”
这份文件清楚地表明，加兰决定不公布涉及机密文件调查的报告，是史密斯本人在周二晚上向加兰传达这份报告时建议的。
“因为第二卷讨论了被告Nauta和De Oliveira的角色，并且因为这些问题仍在本法院上诉，特别律师在给司法部长的附信中解释说，“根据国务院的政策，第二卷不应在他们的案件悬而未决时公开发布，”文件称。
王牌不服罪2023年6月，他受到37项与处理机密材料有关的刑事指控，此前检察官表示，他多次拒绝归还数百份包含从美国核机密到国家国防能力等机密信息的文件，并采取措施阻挠政府收回文件的努力。
前总统，连同诺塔和德奥利维拉，也不服罪在一份替代起诉书中，涉嫌试图删除特朗普Mar-a-Lago庄园的监控录像。
自特朗普去年11月再次当选以来，史密斯一直在逐步减少对前总统的诉讼，原因是司法部的一项长期政策禁止起诉在任总统。
Trump's co-defendants in classified docs case push to block release of Jack Smith's final report
The judge who dismissed former President Donald Trump'sclassified documents caseshould have the final say about the release of special counsel Jack Smith's final report on the case, lawyers for Trump's former co-defendants told a federal appeals court Wednesday afternoon.
The attorneys asked the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals to defer their decision to U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who could hold a hearing over whether to release the report.
"This reflects an improper attempt to remove from the district court the responsibility to oversee and control the flow of information related to a criminal trial over which it presides, and to place that role instead in the hands of the prosecuting authority -- who unlike the trial court has a vested interest in furthering its own narrative of culpability," lawyers for Trump aide Walt Nauta and staffer Carlos De Oliveria argued.
The arguments came a day after Cannontemporarily blockedthe release of Smith's final report in order to prevent "irreparable harm," while the matter is considered by the Eleventh Circuit.
Earlier Wednesday, attorneys in the U.S. attorney general's office said in a filing that Attorney General Merrick Garland does not intend to publicly release the portion of the report related to the classified documents case, though the volume will be available to the ranking members and chairs of the House and Senate Judiciary committees.
Defense lawyers argued in their afternoon filing that the limited disclosure of the full report to the chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees would imperil the case through possible leaks, calling the prosecution a "political case."
"The functioning of the political press depends on leaks, and if such leaks occur here, there will be no recourse for the defendants whose due process rights are at stake," the filing said. "The concern about leaks cannot be overlooked; Congress is a political body; its individual members have political aims; and this is a political case."
Though the defense lawyers acknowledged the politics related to the report in their filing, they accused prosecutors of creating "fake urgency" related to the timing of the report's release.
"The only counsel in this case now claiming urgency is the Attorney General, but the government's brief does not explain this urgency," lawyers wrote in papers filed less than two weeks from Trump's inauguration. "The Attorney General is an office and not an individual: It will continue in perpetuity. The urgency of political activity is a fake urgency."
Prosecutors in their filing also indicted that Garland intends to publicly release the portion of the report related to hisfederal election interference caseagainst Trump.
They argued in their filing that Garland has the "inherent" authority to release the report, and they asked the Eleventh Circuit to vacate Judge Cannon's order and deny the request from Trump's former co-defendants, Nauta and De Oliveira, to block the release of the report.
Prosecutors argued that because Smith already transmitted his report to Garland, the argument made by Trump's former co-defendants about the legitimacy of Smith's appointment is "moot."
"The Attorney General is the Senate-confirmed head of the Department of Justice and is vested with the authority to supervise all officers and employees of the Department. The Attorney General thus has authority to decide whether to release an investigative report prepared by his subordinates," prosecutors said in their filing.
"That authority is inherent in the office of Attorney General; it does not depend on the lawfulness of the Special Counsel's appointment to take actions as an inferior officer of the United States or on the Department's specific regulations authorizing the Attorney General to approve the public release of Special Counsel reports," the filing said.
While defense attorneys had sought to block the release of Volume Two of the report related to the classified documents case -- and not Volume One, which covers Trump'selection interference case-- Judge Cannon's order referred only to the "final report," and not the two volumes within, suggesting that the entire report was blocked from release.
Prosecutors asked the appeals court to "make clear that there is no impediment to the Attorney General allowing for limited congressional review of Volume Two as described above and the publicly release of Volume One."
The filing makes clear that the decision by Garland to not release the volume of the report involving the classified documents investigation was recommended by Smith himself when it was transmitted to Garland Tuesday evening.
"Because Volume Two discusses the roles of defendants Nauta and De Oliveira, and because those matters remain pending appeal before this Court, the Special Counsel explained in his cover letter to the Attorney General that, “consistent with Department policy, Volume Two should not be publicly released while their case remains pending,”" the filing says.
Trumppleaded not guiltyin June 2023 to 37 criminal counts related to his handling of classified materials, after prosecutors said he repeatedly refused to return hundreds of documents containing classified information ranging from U.S. nuclear secrets to the nation's defense capabilities, and took steps to thwart the government's efforts to get the documents back.
The former president, along with Nauta and De Oliveira, alsopleaded not guiltyin a superseding indictment to allegedly attempting to delete surveillance footage at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate.
Smith has been winding down his cases against the former president since Trump was reelected in November, due to a longstanding Department of Justice policy prohibiting the prosecution of a sitting president.
