In a recent development in the criminal trial against former President Donald Trump, former federal prosecutor and legal analyst Glenn Kirschner has made serious allegations against Judge Aileen Cannon. Kirschner claims that Cannon is "orchestrating something even more beneficial" for Trump in his classified documents trial.

Legal experts have highlighted the classified documents case as one of the most damning charges against Trump. The case accuses him of unlawfully retaining sensitive national defense information after leaving the White House in 2021, in violation of the Espionage Act. Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges and criticized the investigation as politically motivated.

Cannon, who was appointed to the bench by Trump during his last months in office, has faced criticism for decisions that have been deemed overtly favorable to the former president. She has been accused of delaying the case's proceedings by holding off on announcing an official trial date.

However, on Thursday, Cannon ruled against a motion from Trump's legal team, which requested the dismissal of his Espionage Act charges. The defense argued that Trump was allowed to retain the documents under the Presidential Records Act (PRA). The Department of Justice's (DOJ) special counsel Jack Smith's team dismissed this argument as "pure fiction." While denying the motion, Cannon did leave open the possibility of reconsidering the argument at a later date in the trial.

Kirschner analyzed Cannon's decision and raised concerns that it was a strategic move to benefit Trump in the long run. By not dismissing the charges immediately, Kirschner argues that Cannon prevents the special counsel from appealing the dismissal. This means that if the charges were to be dismissed later in the trial, after a jury has been sworn and jeopardy has attached, Jack Smith would be unable to appeal. Kirschner believes that this would result in Trump never being held accountable for those crimes.

This accusation is not the first leveled against Cannon. Last month, she denied a motion from Trump's legal team seeking dismissal of 32 out of his 40 charges based on presidential immunity grounds. However, she did so without prejudice, allowing Trump's team to raise the issue at a later date if they choose to.

Neal Katyal, a lawyer and former acting U.S. solicitor general, previously suggested that Cannon's actions were helping Trump delay the federal trial. While Cannon may eventually reject the motions to dismiss, the fact that she held a day-long hearing to discuss their merit in the first place indicates a potential delay tactic.

The implications of Cannon's decisions extend beyond the classified documents case. Katyal draws parallels with the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on whether Trump can claim presidential immunity to dismiss his federal election obstruction case. Although the court is unlikely to grant absolute immunity, the ruling has the potential to delay the trial until after the election. Similarly, Katyal fears that Cannon's actions are prolonging the trial by repeatedly pushing important decisions down the line.

The controversy surrounding Judge Aileen Cannon's rulings in Trump's criminal cases underscores the contentious nature of the legal proceedings. As the trial continues, the attention will remain on Cannon's decisions and their impact on holding the former president accountable for his alleged crimes.