The judge overseeing the federal criminal case in which it is alleged that Donald Trump willfully mismanaged national security secrets issued an order on Wednesday restricting the former president’s utilization of the evidence and prohibiting him from discussing it in public.
The special counsel Jack Smith’s team’s proposal from July regarding how Trump and his attorneys should handle the crucial national security information is essentially reflected in the 16-page ruling from U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon.
According to Cannon, “the restrictions on the disclosure of classified information set forth in this Order are binding upon the Defendant and his counsel and violations may result in criminal and/or civil penalties.” Prosecutors’ version sought for the injunction to be “forever binding.”
The order refers to the items in question as still being classified, despite Trump’s public claims that he had declassified all the records that FBI agents discovered at his Florida club last year while carrying out a search warrant there.
According to Cannon, “the Court finds that this case will include information that has been classified in the name of national security,” and that “the storage, handling, and oversight of this information will need special security precautions.”
“All classified documents or material as well as the information contained therein will stay classified unless the documents or material bears a clear indication that it may have been declassified by the agency or department which is the originating agency of the document, material, or data contained therein,” it adds.
The decision does not, however, preclude Trump’s declassification justifications. The decision by Cannon, who was appointed to the bench by Trump, was “entered without prejudice to any potential challenges” to the “purported classification status of certain documents at issue in this action” or “to arguments/defenses raised under the Presidential Records Act,” according to a footnote.
Trump is also forbidden by the order from addressing any of the secret evidence in public. That also holds true for data that is released into the “public domain” without the government first officially declassifying it.
However, according to Cannon, Trump “may disclose classified data to the defense if needed for the preparation of his defense.”
The judgment further provides that the defense “may disclose classified information to the Defendant” unless the government notifies the defense before disclosing the information that it intends to ask the court for an order prohibiting its publication.
Only in a SCIF, or another “authorized area,” as granted by the court, can the former president and his legal team discuss or examine the classified information, according to Cannon.
Although Cannon had been urged by Trump’s legal team to “re-establish” a SCIF that had been at Mar-a-Lago during his administration, she did not reference that request in her ruling. According to her, a designated “Classified Information Security Officer” who is currently involved in the case would establish “procedures to ensure a SCIF is accessible to the defense during business hours, and at other times upon an acceptable request as approved by the CISO in consultation with the Court as well as United States Marshals Service.”
The directive said that “no classified documents, recordings, or other information, material, can be removed from the SCIF” without prior consent. “The CISO shall keep on file in the SCIF any confidential audio recordings which the Government discloses to the Defense. Such recordings may only be seen on a stand-alone, unconnected computer or other SCIF device that is incapable of duplicating or transmitting data. The order further said that the defense must utilize wired headphones without any wireless capabilities to listen to such recordings.
When contacted for comment on the directive, a Trump representative did not do so right away.
According to a court filing, Trump’s legal representatives “hold at least interim security clearances, authorizing them to have access to secret information marked as “CONFIDENTIAL,” “SECRET,” or “TOP SECRET.”
The choice was made after a Tuesday night closed-door hearing.
Trump was charged in the case in June, despite his denials to the contrary, with lying to federal investigators and conspiring to mislead them in order to keep hold of sensitive government documents that he had removed from the White House and knew were still classified.
Both of Trump’s co-defendants have entered not-guilty pleas to the accusations. In May, a trial for the matter is scheduled.
In the four criminal cases Trump is involved in, this is the third order of this kind that has been issued against him.
Earlier this month, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg filed a lawsuit against the former president, alleging that he falsified business records connected to hush money payments made during his 2016 campaign. Judge Juan Merchan in New York issued an order prohibiting the former president from sharing on social media evidence that had been provided to his attorneys.
Trump’s legal team must abide by guidelines established by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan in an order she issued in August. Chutkan is presiding over Smith’s case in Washington, D.C., in which Smith claims Trump attempted to tamper with the outcome of the 2020 election.
As in his other criminal cases, the former president was not the subject of an order in the fourth criminal case stemming from accusations in Fulton County that he and his associates attempted to overturn Georgia’s election results. However, his bond agreement stated that he “shall make no direct or indirect threat of any nature” against any co-defendant, witness, or victim, the community, or property in the community.
The order stated: “The foregoing shall include, but not be limited to, posts on social media or republishes of posts made by another individual on social media.”
In each of the four cases, Trump entered a not-guilty plea, arguing that the accusations were brought for political reasons.