With a trial date set for December, the clock is quite literally ticking on failed one-term, twice-impeached former president Donald Trump, but the judge in the case — Trump appointee Aileen Cannon — hasn’t yet revealed if she will allow the ex-president to delay the beginning of the proceedings, which is his usual way of avoiding actually facing legal consequences for his actions.
Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance says Cannon had best not agree to such a move by Trump and his legal team or she’ll likely face removal from the trial.
Writing on her Civil Discourse page on Substack, Vance notes that a speedy trial could be both good and bad for Trump.
It’s a bit of a double-edged sword for Trump. He could agree to the December date, which he won’t do, at least not without the intention of asking for a continuance as that date gets closer. If Trump objects to a December trial and asks for a date after the first of the year, the government will undoubtedly demand a ruling that he cannot use rallies, campaign events, and primary dates as an excuse for further delay. Since it would be entirely reasonable, under the government’s proposed schedule, to try the case in December, if Trump asks for additional leeway and the Court grants it, there is no reason it shouldn’t come with conditions that ensure the people get their right to a speedy trial.
Additionally, prosecutors have already made it clear that the case isn’t complex at all and features only only two defendants and is based on well-established case law. So a delay would clearly be just a stalling tactic on Trump’s behalf.
Unless Trump can identify one, it would be a red flag if the judge gave Trump preferential treatment, in terms of continuing to delay proceedings while campaigning, that other defendants can’t receive.
If Judge Cannon does grant a delay that reaches into 2024, it will soon become clear that she has a vested interested and may be trying to protect the man who appointed her to the bench. And that, Vance concludes, would lead to the judge being booted from the case.
There’s no legitimate reason for an extended delay before trial and certainly no reason to delay it until after the 2024 election, more than a year off. A ruling to that effect from Judge Cannon would likely provoke renewed concern about her ability to handle the case in a fair and unbiased way. Expect Trump to make the motion, but a decision by the judge to move the trial that far off would be unprecedented.
