38% of US adults said that the charges related to classified documents found at Trump’s home, should disqualify him from the presidency, with 25% saying that they cast doubts on his fitness for the job, but weren’t disqualifying, and 37% that they were not relevant to his fitness for the presidency.
The share who saw the charges in the documents case as disqualifying if true was higher than the 28% who said the same of the hush money charges for which he was later convicted, but lower than the share who saw charges related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election (43%) or his role in the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol (47%) as disqualifying if true.
Judge Aileen Cannon justified her decision Monday on technical constitutional grounds regarding special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment and the funding of his office.
Her rationale was not based on specifics of this case or the strength or weakness of the charges.
The 93-page ruling from Cannon includes a dense legal discussion about the structure of the special counsel’s office, and why she thinks it doesn’t pass legal muster.
She only mentioned the allegations against Trump in the most cursory fashion, in a single paragraph, where she mentioned the specific crimes the former president was charged with.
The judge added she is not weighing in on other tests Trump and his codefendants brought in this case, and the work done in court to protect classified documents and other evidence in this case remains.
“This Order shall not affect or weaken any of the protections for classified information imposed in this case or any protective orders pertaining to classified information,” Cannon wrote.
