A First Amendment advocacy group is demanding action from U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, reminding the court on Monday that 90 days have passed since it requested the lifting of an injunction blocking the release of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s full report on the Mar-a-Lago classified documents investigation.
The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University filed a formal “Notice of Ninety Days Expiring” urging Judge Cannon to rule on its motion to intervene in the case, in order to allow a separate Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit to proceed and seek disclosure of the secret Volume II of Smith’s final report.
“To date, there has not been a ruling on Intervenor’s Motion to Intervene, and 90 days have elapsed since the Intervenor filed its Reply,” the filing stated. “Intervenor respectfully notifies the Court that its Motion to Intervene is ripe for adjudication.”
The report in question addresses the criminal probe into Donald Trump, former White House aide Waltine “Walt” Nauta, and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos de Oliveira. The case was dismissed in July 2024 after Judge Cannon ruled that Jack Smith’s appointment was invalid. Following Trump’s return to the presidency in January 2025, the Department of Justice quickly dropped charges against Nauta and de Oliveira as well.
Shortly thereafter, Cannon issued an injunction preventing the Biden-era DOJ from providing Volume II to Congress, sparking objections from public interest groups including the Knight Institute and American Oversight.
In March, the DOJ under the Trump administration filed a response arguing the groups’ intervention should be denied. “Neither American Oversight nor Knight Institute has shown that this case fits within the narrow class of circumstances in which courts have previously allowed third parties to intervene in criminal cases,” the DOJ argued.
Furthermore, the DOJ contended that even if the injunction were lifted, the final decision on whether to release Smith’s report lies with Attorney General Pam Bondi. “Neither American Oversight nor Knight Institute has shown it has a common law or First Amendment right of access to Volume II,” the filing added.
However, the Knight Institute maintains that the public’s right to transparency outweighs the objections. In a March brief, the group stated, “Ex-Defendants have not met their burden of showing good cause or a compelling interest sufficient to overcome the presumption of access.” They emphasized that the report involves a former president and national security issues of significant public concern.
Meanwhile, The New York Times continues its own FOIA suit, arguing in a separate court that Cannon’s injunction lacks jurisdiction and should not block public access. “DOJ should be required to complete processing of The Times’s FOIA request,” the paper asserted, “including moving the court in the Southern District of Florida to end or modify the injunction.”
As the legal tug-of-war over public access intensifies, Judge Cannon has yet to respond.