To U.S. district judge denied former President Donald Trump's motion to dismiss his federal classified documents case based on unconstitutional vagueness, one of the two motions - the other being his protection under the Presidential Records Act - that his lawyers used to argue dismissing the case .
.jpg)
In her ruling on the unconstitutional vagueness motion, Judge Aileen Cannon said that while Trump's argument warranted "serious consideration," she did not want to "prematurely decide" the issues raised by Trump's lawyers related to the Espionage Act.
"Although the Motion raises various arguments warranting serious consideration, the Court ultimately determines, following lengthy oral argument, that resolution of the overall question presented depends too greatly on answered instructional questions about still-fluctuating definitions of statutory terms/phrases as charged, along with at least some disputed factual issues as raised in the Motion," the order said.
Cannon dismissed the arguments without prejudice, meaning defense lawyers could raise the argument again later in the case.
She has not yet issued a ruling on Trump's other motion to dismiss that lawyers also argued during today's hearing.
The judge had earlier expressed skepticism regarding the motions to dismiss the indictment throughout the hearing, suggesting that dismissing it based on the Presidential Records Act would be "difficult to see."
Trump was in the Florida courtroom Thursday, where his attorneys argued for the dismissal of his classified documents case.
Cannon began the hearing without making any mention of the case's trial date and instead directed the defense lawyers to begin arguing their motion to dismiss based on unconstitutional vagueness.
"These charges must be struck and dismissed," defense lawyer Emil Bove argued.
Bove suggested that Trump is a victim of a double standard compared to other presidents who allegedly retained sensitive information, directly mentioning the conduct of Presidents Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan and Joe Biden.
Cannon responded to the defense's argument with skepticism - at one point suggesting the defense motion was "premature" - and peppered Bove with questions about definitions and hypotheticals of Trump's conduct.
"When does it become unauthorized?" Cannon asked.
"President Trump designated the records as personal when he took them out of the White House," Bove said.
"What is your definition of unauthorized?" Cannon later asked.
"Judge -- I don't have one, and that is why the statute is unconstitutionally vague applied to President Trump," Bove said.
Discussing unconstitutional vagueness, Cannon also said she was skeptical of dismissing Trump's classified documents case on that motion, describing the request as "remove an extraordinary step."