Donald Trump (left) (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall); Jack Smith (right) (AP Photo: J. Scott Applewhite.)
Donald Trump’s defense lawyers reiterated their demand to push back key Mar-a-Lago case deadlines, calling it a “virtually impossible task” to handle the hush-money trial and the “critical stage” of the Espionage Act case simultaneously.
The Thursday filing from Christopher Kise, Todd Blanche, and Emil Bove maintained that U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon should move a CIPA § 5(a) Notice deadline until three weeks after Trump’s expected six-week New York trial ends.
As Law&Crime explained earlier in the week, the Department of Justice describes a CIPA § 5(a) Notice as the “linchpin” of the Classified Information Procedures Act, a statute that lays out how to guard classified information while using it in a criminal proceeding.
In a weekend filing, special counsel Jack Smith emphasized the “importance” of the “crucial” CIPA § 5(a) Notice in “getting the case to trial,” as the notice will reveal whether the Trump defense intends to use classified materials obtained through discovery “in any manner in connection with any trial or pretrial proceeding[.]”
Smith asserted that the Trump team “must stop” pushing “reflexively” for more delays whenever Cannon sets a deadline. He implored the Mar-a-Lago judge to keep the May 9 CIPA § 5(a) Notice and expert witness disclosure deadlines in place, arguing that the defense has had months to meet the deadlines and should not be rewarded with “open-ended” delay based on Trump choosing to have the same lawyers defend him in the Mar-a-Lago and New York criminal cases.
Trump lawyers replied on Thursday that Smith is ignoring the “obvious and substantial prejudice” to Trump that would result from keeping the May 9 deadlines in place.
“Simply put, President Trump and his counsel cannot prepare—or even discuss—the required filings anywhere but an appropriate SCIF, a virtually impossible task given President Trump and Messrs. Blanche and Bove’s involvement in People v. Trump, Ind. No. 71543-2023 in New York, New York,” the reply said, rejecting the special counsel’s contention that the defense twiddled its thumbs for months simply to delay.
“President Trump and his counsel have not been sitting idle over the past months and have worked diligently to advance the case forward,” the reply continued. “That said, certain tasks remain for completion which can only be accomplished in the Florida SCIF.”
The defense further stated that attorney Bove is “principally responsible for all classified and CIPA litigation in this case on behalf of President Trump,” and that local Florida counsel “are not capable of handling alone the tasks remaining to finalize the CIPA § 5(a) process.”
The lawyers called it “disingenuous at best” of Smith to say that local counsel with security clearances could fill Bove’s role since the Special Counsel’s Office (SCO) praised Bove’s “experience” on this very issue in court last month.
“We have every expectation, knowing, again, Mr. Bove and his experience, that the Court — that they would — in this case they will file a sufficient — a sufficient notice, the SCO said, according to the reply, which emphasized the notice deadline is a “critical stage” in the case.
The defense added in a footnote saying that Smith knows local counsel can’t get the job done:
As the SCO is well aware, local counsel are not even able to discuss the relevant issues or seek any guidance from Mr. Bove outside the Florida SCIF.
Read the latest Trump request for delay here.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
Follow Law&Crime:
