In a recent blog post, former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance highlighted the ongoing issues surrounding the rulings made by Judge Aileen Cannon in Donald Trump's classified documents trial. Vance argues that these rulings deviate from the typical courtroom rules and may lead to a prolonged legal battle.

Judge Cannon, a Trump appointee, denied the former president's legal team's request to dismiss the case based on the Presidential Records Act. However, Vance points out that the judge left "ambiguity" as to whether the act could be applicable in this particular case. Federal prosecutors argue that it should not.

The MSNBC legal analyst believes that this case will likely head to the 11th Circuit before the trial, as the prosecution is likely to appeal the outstanding issues to a higher court. Vance contends that Judge Cannon's decisions have created uncertainty, necessitating further clarification from an appellate court.

The case in Florida revolves around classified documents found at Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort during an FBI raid in 2022. Among the over 13,000 seized documents, 103 were deemed classified. These documents were allegedly retained by Trump after leaving the White House. Federal law states that classified documents are the property of the U.S. government and must be turned over for archiving at the end of a presidential term.

This Florida case is one of two brought against Trump by Special Counsel Jack Smith. The other case, in Washington D.C., focuses on allegations that Trump attempted to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges and has consistently described them as politically motivated.

The former president's legal team argues that the Presidential Records Act granted Trump the authority to designate classified material as personal records. However, Vance and others argue that this act has no relevance to charges under the Espionage Act, which makes it illegal to possess unauthorized documents related to national defense.

Cannon has yet to resolve several issues in the case, leading to allegations that she may be intentionally delaying its progression. Some speculate that if Trump were to win the presidential election, he could potentially instruct the Justice Department to drop the case.

Recently, Cannon asked Prosecutor Jack Smith for jury instructions related to the Presidential Records Act, prompting him to seek clarification on her stance on the matter. Smith believes that a clear ruling on the act's applicability is necessary before the trial begins to avoid potential double jeopardy implications if an acquittal is reached.

In response, Cannon issued a memo denying Trump's motion to dismiss and criticizing Smith's request as "unprecedented and unjust." She clarified that her instructions should not be seen as a final definition of any crucial element or defense in the case but rather an attempt to understand the parties' positions and questions to be submitted to the jury.

Vance finds it unusual for a judge to request jury instructions at this stage, while pre-trial motions are still pending. She argues that Cannon is using this tactic as a means to avoid ruling on Trump's motion to dismiss based on the Presidential Records Act.

Highlighting Cannon's repeated delay in making crucial pre-trial rulings, Vance suggests that prosecutors may need to strategize to ensure prompt decisions or appeal to a higher court. She questions whether any panel of 11th Circuit judges, at this point, would believe that the judge should step aside.

As the trial date nears, it remains to be seen how these ongoing disagreements will be resolved and what impact they will have on Trump's classified documents case.