Judge Aileen Cannon’s decision to dismiss the case against Donald Trump in connection with the secret federal documents will be overturned by the courts, a legal expert said.

David Lat, a former federal prosecutor and legal commentator, said in a blog post that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit would support special counsel Jack Smith and “overturn” Cannon’s decision.

Cannon ruled in July that the 40 charges against Trump for allegedly misusing classified documents and trying to prevent the government from collecting them from his Mar-a-Lago resort should be dropped. Trump pleaded not guilty to all counts.

Cannon, who was nominated as a judge by Trump, supported the former president’s argument that Smith was improperly appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland as special counsel in the case because the Senate had not previously approved the decision.

Smith appealed the decision to the 11th Circuit, arguing that Cannon’s decision was “contrary to widespread and long-standing appointment practices” of the Justice Department.

In his blog, Original Jurisdiction, Lat predicted that the 11th Circuit would overturn Cannon’s decision, noting that attorney Ken White had called Smith’s brief “very strong” and “completely brutal.”

“Interestingly, however, Judge Aileen Cannon is not being sought to be removed from the case,” Lat wrote.

“I stand by my previous prediction that the Eleventh Circuit will overturn Judge Cannon’s ruling,” he wrote.

“But I remain uncertain how the Supreme Court would rule if it decided to hear the case, given the strong feelings some conservative justices have about the separation of powers and executive power – which of course is reflected in their decision in Trump against the United States (also known as immunity case).”

In a historic decision in July, the Supreme Court ruled that Trump is entitled to some immunity from prosecution for official acts, which could upend Smith’s federal 2020 election obstruction case against the former president.

The dispute over the secret documents could also end up in the Supreme Court, with both sides likely to appeal the 11th Circuit’s decision.

Greg Germain, a law professor at Syracuse University in New York, had previously said that Cannon’s reasons for dismissing the case over the secret documents were “extremely weak,” but that the Supreme Court could side with her if the case went before the highest court in the land.

“There is no way to know for sure what the Supreme Court will say, but given the Supreme Court’s extremely broad view of the separation of powers in the Trump immunity case, there is a good chance the Court will agree with Judge Cannon that the sweeping, unsupervised powers granted to Jack Smith are unlawful and that the special counsel provision is too broad,” Germain said. Newsweek.

Cannon’s decision follows several rulings she made that appeared to benefit the former president in the classified documents case, including hesitant decisions that legal experts say should have been thrown out immediately, meaning the trial would almost certainly not take place before the November election.

If Trump wins the 2024 election, he could order the Justice Department to drop the federal investigation into him once he takes office in January 2025.

There were frequent calls for Cannon to be removed from the case because of her previous convictions, but Smith seemed unwilling to take the necessary steps to do so.

The Ministry of Justice was asked for a comment by email.

In its Aug. 26 brief to the 11th Circuit, Smith’s office said the attorney general has the “requisite superior authority” to direct the Justice Department’s work, including appointing special counsels without authorization.

“Precedent and history confirm this authority, as does the long tradition of attorneys general appointing special counsels and Congress’s approval of this practice through appropriations and other legislation,” it said.

“The district court’s contrary holding runs counter to an otherwise unbroken line of decisions, including from the Supreme Court, that the Attorney General has such authority, and it runs counter to widespread and longstanding appointment practices in the Justice Department and throughout the government.”