are foe potentially going to be testifying at trial in this case about the facts of this case. the other thing is this is one of those rare moments that you had donald trump physically in court right in the same room as special counsel jack smith and the prosecutors who are charging him, and when he came into the room initially he had a very clear view of jack smith, was essentially turned to face him directly, and looked at him for quite a long time. smith looked back. they never shook hands. they never really nodded. but it was quite a tense moment. erin. well, almost like a staring contest. it s amazing to imagine something you were able to witness there. i know you have new reporting on some people watching the proceedings in court today. important people to this. what can you tell us about a them? reporter: it was a full courtroom, but there was one row in the courtroom full of judges in this court. seven judges, both magistrate judges, the type of judges like
district court judge, in this case judge coop, is the one that hears the issue, reads the filings and issues the order and if either party has an issue with that then it can be appealed to an appellate court. this court is unique in the country, which it allows magistrate judges like judge reinhart to actually weigh in on and be the judge that hears these issues initially. and my point is if a party has issues with what a magistrate judge rules with respect to classified information they then appeal it to judge cannon and then judge cannon would go through the entire process again, probably have another hearing, more filings, and then issue a ruling and then that could be appealed. and my point is it injects delay into the process because perhaps right now the most important thing we re looking for is can these proceedings, can this trial occur within a reasonable period of time. and joyce, i think the reason i really wanted to understand that from brandon, who has explained this to
where this case is has an obscure practice when it comes to classified information, this law, the classified information procedures act, which is that it allows magistrate judges to hear issues involving cepa and jung cannon is a district court judge. it s in essence sending these issues to another judge. and the point here isn t to get into the differences between a magistrate judge and a district court judge. the point is i want to see whether judge cannon is actually going to take these hearings and these filings on herself, which will expedite the process, versus sending them to a magistrate judge, which can then be appealed to judge cannon, which would be a source for delay. so i think that s another piece. and finally i m going to be curious to see how the department of justice articulates that limitation that you referenced in terms of the defendants not being able to necessarily access all the classified information. brandon, you first mentioned
judge aileen cannon presiding over the trial. first of all, the fact that a magistrate judge is presiding over the arraignment is entirely usual. magistrate judges handle all sorts of preliminary matters, arraignments, and preliminary hearings. but, we already see judge cannon has a track record. and, you know, she ruled in favor of donald trump, and she exercised jurisdiction in a way that a three judge unanimous appellate court panel said wasn t abuse of her discretion. in fact, they said, the reason we have this very exact test for when a judge can weigh in in an ongoing criminal prosecution, or delay it, the reason we have that exacting test is to prevent trial court judges from interfering in the ongoing executive branch investigations. those are pretty strong words,
entirely usual. magistrate judges handle all sorts of preliminary matters, arraignments, and preliminary hearings. but, we already see judge cannon has a track record. and, you know, she ruled in favor of donald trump, and she exercised jurisdiction in a way that a three judge unanimous appellate court panel said wasn t abuse of her discretion. in fact, they said, the reason we have this very exact test for when a judge can weigh in in an ongoing criminal prosecution, or delay it, the reason we have that exacting test is to prevent trial court judges from interfering in the ongoing executive branch investigations. those are pretty strong words, and that s what judge cannon did. and, you know, we have a rule. there is a federal law that says a judge must recuse, that is remove himself or herself from a case if their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. given judge cannon s track record of unfortunately calling it in favor of donald trump in a way that was an abusive, abuse of he