Florida Judge in Trump Documents Case Hears Arguments on Trial Date, No Decision Made

FORT PIERCE, Fla.—President Donald Trump is appearing before U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon today for a hearing concerning his request to delay the trial on federal criminal charges related to the retention of classified documents after leaving the White House.

President Trump was indicted in 2023 on 40 felony charges related to allegedly mishandling classified documents from the time he was in the White House, resulting in an FBI raid on his Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Florida. The former president has defended his actions and argues he is protected by the Presidential Records Act.

The current trial date for the case is May 20.

Attorneys for President Trump argued that conducting the trial during the election would be unfair.

“We very much continue to believe that a trial that takes place before the election is a mistake and should not happen,” Todd Blanche, an attorney representing the former president, said during the hearing.

Mr. Blanche argued that the trial would take up to five weeks in addition to jury selection and that there was no harm in delaying the start.

Related Stories

“There’s no reason this trial can’t start until late November,” Mr. Blanche said.

Attorneys for President Trump also argued that the case should be dismissed based on his claim of presidential immunity. The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Feb. 28 that it would consider related to separate charges that he interfered with the result of the 2020 presidential election.

Special Counsel Jack Smith, who filed the charges in the classified documents case, filed a motion on Feb. 29 requesting a new trial date of July 8 and proposed a schedule for going forward that includes monthly status conferences so the court can ensure deadlines are being met.

Mr. Smith attended the March 1 hearing but allowed staff attorneys Jay Bratt and David Harbach to handle arguments concerning the timeline of the trial.

Mr. Bratt pushed for a trial date no later than July, saying, “This case can be tried this summer.” He accused the defense of using needless hearings as a delaying tactic.

Judge Cannon did not immediately rule but hinted that she did not see the case as being on the cusp of trial, telling lawyers that “a lot of work remains to be done.”

Trump sat quietly and appeared to listen intently to the arguments, at times whispering with Blanche. Smith was also present, as were Trump’s two co-codefendants in the case, his valet Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira.

President Trump’s attorneys argued that the 6th Amendment affords him the right to be present and to participate in the legal proceedings, while at the same time, the 1st Amendment affords him—and the American people—the right to engage in his campaign speech-making.

Judge Cannon, in November 2023, denied a motion from President Trump’s attorneys to change the trial date but said she would consider a delay at a scheduling conference on March 1. She also decided to set new pre-trial deadlines for the case due to the “high volume” of classified documents to be examined in the discovery process.

The scheduling conference to decide on delaying the classified documents trial is set to begin at 10 a.m. at the Fort Pierce Courthouse in Fort Pierce, Florida.

He was indicted along with two co-defendants—his aide Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira—who also face charges for allegedly hiding and mishandling classified documents at the former president’s Florida residence.

Special counsel Jack Smith is leading the prosecution in both the classified documents case in Florida and the case regarding President Trump’s actions on Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington.

She added that “Defendants’ personal review of the contents of the classified documents are not ‘useful to counter the government’s case or bolster a defense.’”

“Defendants Nauta and De Oliveira still fail to provide any examples of documents produced in classified discovery that—if made available to them for personal review—would be helpful in countering the allegation that they conspired to help Defendant Trump ‘keep classified documents he had taken with him from the White House’ and ‘hide and conceal them from a federal grand jury,’” the judge said.

The defendants argued in previous court filings that some of the requested documents relate to pursuing a defense based on “selective and vindictive prosecution.”

They presented emails released through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that allegedly showed the White House coordinating with the Department of Justice (DOJ) on the court case. Defense attorneys are seeking additional materials through court discovery to have the case dismissed.

Prosecutors responded on Feb. 26 that the defendants’ arguments amount to a “conspiracy theory” and that they have thus far failed to provide “clear and convincing evidence.”

Jury Questionnaire Dispute

Most recently, prosecutors and defense attorneys finished creating a joint jury questionnaire and submitted it to the court on Feb. 28, establishing what questions will be asked of prospective jurors in the classified documents case.

Both sides disagreed on the list of questions. Prosecutors wanted it to stay filed under seal until after jury selection, saying that revealing questions in the high-profile case would be similar to giving out answers before a test.

Defendants argued it should not be filed under seal and should be accessible to the public.

Prosecutors objected to questions gauging jurors’ feelings towards police, law enforcement, and the criminal justice system, while the defendants objected to questions asking jurors if they believed the 2020 U.S. presidential election was stolen.

The final jury questionnaire—and the questions it will contain—is still to be determined.

Catherine Yang, Jack Phillips, and Caden Pearson contributed to this report.