Left: Ryan Wesley Routh (Law&Crime). Center: U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida). Right: Donald Trump speaks at the annual Road to Majority conference in Washington, DC, in June 2024 (Allison Bailey/NurPhoto via AP).
While the Special Counsel’s Office and Judge Aileen Cannon’s sparring in Donald Trump’s since dismissed Mar-a-Lago case was well-documented and at times left some wondering whether Jack Smith would seek her disqualification, though that did not happen. Ryan Routh, the 58-year-old convicted felon charged with attempting to assassinate Trump as he golfed, has sought Cannon’s recusal, however, and now federal prosecutors have responded by defending the judge.
As Law&Crime reported last week, Routh highlighted that Cannon was appointed the lifetime judgeship by Trump in 2020 and claimed the former president’s public praise of her for tossing the Mar-a-Lago case, plus the “prospect” of a “promotion” to the U.S. Supreme Court if Trump wins the 2024 election, made it reasonable to question whether Cannon could impartially handle the attempted assassination case.
“This motion is warranted due to the unique facts and circumstances of this case, and this Court’s relationship to the alleged victim. Recusal by Your Honor is essential to preserve the appearance of impartiality,” Routh argued.
“Mr. Trump is the current Republican candidate for President in next month’s election. On the campaign trail, he has repeatedly praised Your Honor for her rulings in his case. As the alleged victim here, he has a significant stake in the outcome of this case too,” his filing added. “Were he to become President in the future, he would have authority to nominate Your Honor to a federal judgeship on a higher court were a vacancy to arise.”
In a brief filing on Monday, prosecutors in the Southern District of Florida said the defendant’s recusal request was supported by little more than speculation without a “sufficient legal or factual basis[.]”
“This Court’s discretion to recuse from this matter is subject to review only for abuse of discretion,” prosecutors began. “Here, Routh’s motion does not cite any authority mandating recusal in these circumstances, and does not present either facts or case law requiring recusal on this record in light of the controlling standard.”
Prosecutors next cited several cases, one of them emphasizing that “unsupported, irrational, or highly tenuous speculation” is no ground for a judge’s recusal. Another cited case noted that challenging Cannon’s assignment to the case based on the fact Trump appointed her was destined to fail.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
