Alex Wagner gave a brief background of how Judge Aileen Cannon became a U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Florida, and it was filled with eye-opening details. While noting Judge Cannon's remarkably limited judicial experience (she'd never been a judge before her lifetime appointment and had only ever taken four cases to a jury verdict), the New York Times also mentioned some curious details about the questionnaire she filled out for the US Senate Judiciary Committee, one which omitted any writings on judicial matters at all, covering instead such varied topics as tomatoes and yoga, among others. It didn't seem to matter though, as her confirmation vote came just a few days after the 2020 presidential election, with twelve Democrats voting for her, including the ranking member for the Democrats Diane Feinstein. The lifetime appointment seems to have been rushed through by the Trump administration, as twenty-three Senators didn't vote at all. And her vote came the same day as Sen. Lindsey Graham was trying to convince Georgia's Secretary of State to overturn the election. A cynic might speculate that she was fast-tracked through with an ulterior motive in mind.
Source: New York Times
Aileen M. Cannon, the Federal District Court judge assigned to preside over former President Donald J. Trump’s classified documents case, has scant experience running criminal trials, calling into question her readiness to handle what is likely to be an extraordinarily complex and high-profile courtroom clash.
The Times then mentions that since 98% of Federal cases are resolved in plea deals, she's actually had remarkably limited experience presenting at trial, something one would think would come in handy for a Judge, especially one with a lifetime appointment. Other details, though, caught my eye.
Other parts of Judge Cannon’s questionnaire answers put forward few experiences or accomplishments that clearly distinguished her as seasoned and demonstrably ready for the powers and responsibilities of a lifetime appointment to be a federal judge.
It asked, for example, for every published writing she had produced. She listed 20 items. Of those, 17 were pieces she had written in the summer of 2002 as a college intern at The Miami Herald’s Spanish-language sister publication, El Nuevo Herald, with headlines like “Winners in the Library Quest Competition.” The other three were articles published on Gibson Dunn’s website describing cases the firm had handled, each of which had three other co-authors.
The questionnaire also asked her to provide all reports, memorandums and policy statements she had written for any organization, all testimony or official statements on public or legal policy she had ever delivered to any public body, and all her speeches, talks, panel discussions, lectures or question-and-answer sessions.
“None,” she wrote.
And what were her writings?
During a span of three months, Cannon’s work as an intern two decades ago was published in el Nuevo Herald.
On her judicial application she listed, as requested, “titles, publishers and dates of books, articles, reports, letters to the editor, editorial pieces, or other published material you have written or edited, including material published on the Internet.” Cannon listed 20 items. Three were scholarly in nature, and 17 were short news items in el Nuevo Herald from summer 2002. Headlines included: “Tomatoes may help reduce tumors,” “The Atoms Family: An Exhibition about Energy,” “Prenatal Yoga: A Healthy Alternative for Delivery.”
