In the ongoing legal battle surrounding Donald Trump's retention of classified documents, the federal judge presiding over the case appeared skeptical about setting a trial date in July. US District Judge Aileen Cannon expressed reservations during a court hearing on Friday, finding the proposed timeline by special counsel prosecutors unworkable.

While a new trial date was not set during the hearing, the current May date is expected to be scrapped due to repeated delays. It remains uncertain whether Judge Cannon will adopt the competing schedules proposed by Trump and prosecutors or set her own timeline.

The skepticism shown by Judge Cannon arose as prosecutors and Trump's legal team debated forthcoming deadlines that could significantly impact not only the documents case but also the federal 2020 election interference case in Washington.

In a related matter, John Merchant, an attorney representing one of Trump's co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case, argued for the disqualification of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. Merchant claimed that even the appearance of a conflict of interest between Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade would undermine public confidence in the legal system.

Merchant further contended that if the bid to disqualify Willis is denied, there is a high likelihood of an appeals court ordering a new trial based on the alleged conflict. The judge overseeing the Fulton County racketeering case against Trump and his co-defendants, Judge Scott McAfee, noted that he might make a decision on Willis today, even if additional evidence is presented.

During the hearing, the question of whether holding Trump's classified documents trial before the November presidential election would violate the Justice Department's policy against taking actions close to an election was raised. Judge Cannon, at the Florida hearing on Thursday, raised concerns about potential violations of the department's "60-day rule."

Special counsel prosecutor Jay Bratt assured the judge that the trial is permissible as the policy does not apply to post-indictments. He maintained that they are fully compliant with the Justice Department's guidelines. This means that Trump's federal trials could potentially proceed during the fall campaign and voting period.

Amidst the debate over timelines, Trump's legal team argued that the proposed schedule was too slow. They highlighted the logistical challenge of Trump simultaneously being on trial in New York for his hush money case while attending hearings in Florida. In response, the special counsel's office expressed frustration, emphasizing their desire to keep the case moving forward.

As the hearing progressed, it was revealed that prosecutors requested Judge Cannon to reconsider her ruling allowing Trump to make public certain FBI documents produced during discovery. They argued that Cannon applied the wrong legal standard by permitting exhibits without redactions. Prosecutors warned of their intention to appeal if the decision is not reversed.

The afternoon session of the hearing will focus on this request and the prosecutors' assertion that public identification of more than two dozen individuals involved in the investigation, including potential witnesses, is unnecessary.

The outcome of this ongoing legal battle will have significant implications for both Trump and the credibility of the legal system. As various arguments are presented and decisions are made, the timeline for the trial and the disqualification of prosecutors will become clearer.