A judge in Florida dismissed the case against former President Trump about handling classified documents.
Trump faced charges from special counsel Jack Smith's investigation. The charges were related to his possession of classified materials at Mar-a-Lago. Trump pleaded not guilty to all 37 felony counts.
"Former President Trump’s Motion to Dismiss Indictment Based on the Unlawful Appointment and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith is GRANTED in accordance with this Order," wrote U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon. "The Superseding Indictment is DISMISSED because Special Counsel Smith’s appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution."
Trump, following the ruling, told Fox News' Bret Baier he was "thrilled that a judge had the courage and wisdom to do this. This has big, big implications, not just for this case but for other cases.
"The special counsel worked with everyone to try to take me down," Trump added from Milwaukee. "This is a big, big deal. It only makes this convention more positive. This will be an amazing week."
The Appointments Clause says, "Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States be appointed by the President subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, although Congress may vest the appointment of inferior officers in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments." Smith was never confirmed by the Senate.
"Upon careful study of the foundational challenges raised in the Motion, the Court is convinced that Special Counsel’s Smith’s prosecution of this action breaches two structural cornerstones of our constitutional scheme," Cannon wrote. "The role of Congress in the appointment of constitutional officers, and the role of Congress in authorizing expenditures by law."
"The Framers gave Congress a pivotal role in the appointment of principal and inferior officers. That role cannot be usurped by the Executive Branch or diffused elsewhere," she continued. "Whether in this case or in another case, whether in times of heightened national need or not."
"In the case of inferior officers, that means Congress is empowered to decide if it wishes to vest appointment power in a Head of Department," Cannon added. "Congress has proven itself quite capable of doing so in many other statutory contexts. But it plainly did not do so here, despite the Special Counsel’s strained statutory readings."
"In the end, it seems the Executive’s growing comfort in appointing ‘regulatory’ special counsels in the more recent era has followed an ad hoc pattern with little judicial scrutiny," she also said.
Earlier this month, Trump requested a partial pause in the classified documents case. This came after a U.S. Supreme Court decision found that presidents have substantial immunity for official acts that occurred while they were in office.
Lawyers for Trump asked a Florida court to pause all proceedings. They want the judge to apply the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling to the facts of the case.
Smith can appeal Monday's ruling.