WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal judge in Florida presiding over the classified documents prosecution of former President Donald Trump has canceled the May 20 trial date, postponing it indefinitely.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal judge in Florida presiding over the classified documents prosecution of former President Donald Trump has canceled the May 20 trial date, postponing it indefinitely.
It must be nice to live in a world where you appoint your own judge. It’s time for Smith to take action.
https://casetext.com/statute/united-states-code/title-28-judiciary-and-judicial-procedure/part-i-organization-of-courts/chapter-21-general-provisions-applicable-to-courts-and-judges/section-455-disqualification-of-justice-judge-or-magistrate-judge
They can be removed but then the next guy mysteriously falls out of a window.
Smith has been working on getting this crazy Judge removed for a while…
He hasn’t filed anything yet. She was way off base asking for jury instructions so early. Not to mention the PRA pre-trial defense was struck down without prejudice, meaning the defense may use it in the trial. Removing the trial from the calendar entirely is the icing on the cake.
The “without predujice” term reminds me of sovcits
Without prejudice is a legal term.
If something is denied without prejudice it means it was denied for some sort of procedural reason. As the underlying question of law hasn’t been ruled on, you are free to refile after correcting whatever error got it denied.
If something is denied with prejudice, it cannot be refiled as the judge made a judgment on the legal claim and denied it on that basis.
He certainly has and has a history of doing so.
He hates her for all the right reasons, and is doing anything he can to get her removed from the case.
Edit: tbf, so is she
He has absolutely pushed back on her requests. What I mean is that he hasn’t filed a motion for recusal based on impartiality.
This ruling from her may have been the last straw he was waiting for before he filed the motion for her to recuse
From what I’ve heard he only gets one shot at a motion for recusal, so he’s waiting until there’s no chance the recusal will be denied.
Or so I hope
Well it seems like he kept his powder so dry it blew away in the breeze.
At this point she should be considered an accessory to his crimes.
The judges impartiality is in question. The judge is demonstrating partiality to one side of the case.
Impartiality would imply that she’s not partial to one side or the other when she’s clearly favoring the defendant.
That is correct. I corrected my error.