In a stunning decision, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon has dismissed the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump, halting what experts considered the strongest and most straightforward of the prosecutions against him. However, the dismissal is far from the final word, as special counsel Jack Smith has announced plans to appeal the judge's order. The appeal has the potential to escalate the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, leading to the possible reinstatement of the indictment and a potential reassignment of the case to a different judge.

The legal wrangling surrounding the case is expected to continue for many more months, as the appeal process unfolds. The decision by Judge Cannon to dismiss the case came after months of interminable delays, causing frustration among legal experts. Former federal judge Nancy Gertner criticized Judge Cannon's lack of decisions, stating that "The difficulty with Judge Cannon has been that she has made no decisions. She has simply sat on the case."

In her 93-page order, Judge Cannon declared that Jack Smith's appointment as special counsel violated the Constitution since he was named to the position directly by Attorney General Merrick Garland instead of being appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The prosecution vehemently disputed this argument put forward by Trump's legal team. The constitutionality of special counsels appointed by the Justice Department leadership and funded by a permanent indefinite appropriation has been upheld by other judges in different districts in recent years.

The 50-year-old Supreme Court opinion involving President Richard Nixon established that the Justice Department possesses the statutory authority to appoint a special prosecutor. While Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas recently raised questions about the legality of Smith's appointment, none of the other justices joined his concurring opinion. The Smith team is anticipated to leverage these court holdings to present Judge Cannon's order as an outlier.

Smith's office announced that the Justice Department has authorized the appeal, stressing that Judge Cannon's opinion deviates from the unanimous conclusions reached in previous courts. However, Jesse Panuccio, a former associate attorney general in the Trump administration, defended Cannon's opinion, stating that it was a "careful and scholarly" analysis. He noted that the issue of independent and special counsels has been a matter of concern for legal scholars for years.

Judge Cannon, a Trump appointee, has faced criticism from the Justice Department even before the indictment was filed. The possibility of seeking her removal could arise if prosecutors find fault with her handling of the case. Cannon's decision to appoint an independent arbiter to review the seized records at Mar-a-Lago, later overturned by a federal appeals panel, further exacerbated tensions. It remains unclear if Smith's team will request her reassignment should the appeals court reinstate the case.

The prospect of assigning a case to a different judge is not unprecedented, and legal experts believe it may be warranted in this instance. The court's criteria for reassigning a case include preserving the appearance of justice and determining whether the original judge would have difficulty in setting aside their previous views and findings.

As the appeal process begins, legal scholars are divided on the potential outcomes. However, it is certain that the legal battle surrounding the classified documents case against Donald Trump will continue, prolonging the resolution of the matter.