Special counsel Jack Smith’s report on President-elect Trump’s Jan. 6 election interference case could be released as early as Monday after a federal appeals court denied a bid to keep it secret.
Now that the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has decided not to block the report, Attorney General Merrick Garland is expected to release it anytime after a three-day court-ordered grace period expires next week, unless the Supreme Court steps in.
The appeals court Thursday night quickly overruled an unusual decision to keep the report sealed by U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon, who has handed Trump a string of legal wins in the documents case.
Smith created the legally mandated report with one volume covering Trump’s effort to overturn his 2020 election loss and a separate one covering his probe of the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case after dropping the cases following Trump’s reelection in November.
Garland has the ultimate authority to decide whether to release Smith’s report and has repeatedly said he would do so, as he has done with other special counsel reports, like the separate one concerning the probe into President Biden’s mishandling of classified documents.
The Justice Department has said it does not plan to publicly release the volume of Smith’s report dealing with the classified documents case as long as the criminal case against two Trump co-defendants remains pending.
There could be more legal wrangling before Cannon or the Supreme Court if Trump or his co-defendants in the documents case appeal the 11th Circuit decision to the Supreme Court.
A Trump spokesperson said Smith’s report would be a “unconstitutional, one-sided, falsehood-ridden screed.”
“It is time for Joe Biden and Merrick Garland to do the right thing and put a final stop to the political weaponization of our Justice system,” spokesperson Steven Cheung said in a statement after the ruling.
The two-volume report is expected to detail findings and explain charging decisions in Smith’s two investigations, though the prospect for significant new information is unclear given the extensive details already disclosed in separate indictments against Trump.
Smith’s team abandoned both cases after Trump’s presidential election victory, citing Justice Department policy that prohibits the federal prosecutions of sitting presidents.
The election interference case was significantly narrowed by a Supreme Court ruling granting him significant immunity for official acts taken in office. The court ruled then for the first time that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution, ending any realistic prospect Trump could be tried before the November election.
The case accusing Trump of illegally hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate had already been dismissed in July by Cannon, who concluded that Smith’s appointment was illegal.
Smith’s appeal of the dismissal of charges against Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, who were charged alongside Trump with obstructing the investigation, is still active. But Trump has vowed to end their prosecution once he returns to office Jan. 20.