A watchdog organization has filed a request with a federal appeals court to remove Judge Aileen Cannon from overseeing the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump.

According to MSNBC, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) submitted a brief to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that Judge Cannon should be disqualified due to apparent bias.

The filing by CREW comes in the wake of Judge Cannon's dismissal of the classified documents case, which special counsel Jack Smith challenged. While Smith did not explicitly request Cannon's removal in his appeal, CREW has taken the initiative to address concerns about the judge's impartiality in handling the high-profile case.

CREW's Arguments For Judge Cannon's Removal

CREW's brief focuses on three main areas of concern regarding Judge Cannon's handling of the case. The first issue raised is her unprecedented assertion of "equitable jurisdiction" to block the government from using or viewing documents seized at Mar-a-Lago through a lawful search warrant.

Secondly, the watchdog group points to Judge Cannon's call for jury instructions on what they describe as a "spurious legal defense" that could have significantly weakened the government's case had it proceeded to trial. This move by the judge has been viewed as potentially favoring the defendant.

The third argument presented by CREW relates to Judge Cannon's apparent lack of progress in moving the case forward over the course of a year. The group notes that significant action only occurred after a Supreme Court justice's concurring opinion expressed approval of a novel constitutional theory that ultimately led to the case's dismissal.

Challenges In Removing Judge Cannon

Despite the arguments put forth by CREW, removing Judge Cannon from the case may face significant hurdles. One of the main challenges stems from the context in which the appeal arises, particularly her dismissal of the case based partly on reasoning from a sitting Supreme Court justice.

CREW's brief notes that Judge Cannon swiftly penned a 93-page decision dismissing the case, relying on the reasoning presented in Justice Clarence Thomas' lone concurrence in a separate immunity decision. While the 11th Circuit may disagree with both Cannon and Thomas, using the judge's endorsement of a justice's opinion as grounds for removal could be seen as problematic.

Potential Impact On Case Timeline

The appeals process and potential removal of Judge Cannon could further impact the timeline of the classified documents case. There are concerns that a resolution may not be reached before the possibility of Trump retaking the White House and potentially dismissing the case himself.

Jordan Rubin of MSNBC's Deadline: Legal Blog states:

Such a scenario would underscore the degree to which Cannon's slow walking of the case will have helped Trump tank it without facing trial. But that isn't much help to Smith in the meantime.

This observation highlights the potential consequences of delays in legal proceedings and the importance of timely resolution in high-stakes cases involving political figures.

Questions Surrounding Special Counsel Appointment

The appeal also raises broader questions about the validity of special counsel Jack Smith's appointment. While Justice Thomas' concurrence in the immunity case questioned the constitutionality of Smith's appointment, it remains unclear how other justices view this issue.

In conclusion, the watchdog group CREW has requested the removal of Judge Aileen Cannon from the Trump classified documents case, citing concerns about apparent bias. Their brief outlines three main areas of contention regarding the judge's handling of the case. However, removing Cannon may face challenges due to the context of her dismissal based on a Supreme Court justice's opinion. The ongoing appeal process and potential removal could impact the case's timeline, with broader implications for the special counsel's appointment and the progression of Trump's federal cases.