Ben Harnwell and Mike Davis discussed the latest legal maneuvers involving Jack Smith on Monday’s WarRoom. They discussed the Special Counsel appointed to investigate President Donald Trump. The conversation focused on a significant ruling by Judge Aileen Cannon, which dismissed the charges brought against Trump related to presidential records, citing constitutional grounds.

Mike Davis explained that Judge Cannon’s ruling was based on the unconstitutionality of Jack Smith’s appointment as Special Counsel.

According to Davis, “Judge Aileen Cannon in the Southern District of Florida dismissed the charges brought by Jack Smith against President Trump related to the presidential records that President Trump was allowed to have under the Presidential Records Act.”

He further elaborated on the constitutional issue, stating that Smith’s role as Special Counsel violates the structure of the executive branch as outlined in the U.S. Constitution. “Jack Smith’s appointment as the Special Counsel, is unconstitutional. He is not an officer of the United States and does not report on a day-to-day basis to an officer of the United States,” Davis noted.

Davis, of Article Three Project, emphasized that, for an appointment like Smith’s to be constitutional, the individual must be supervised on a day-to-day basis by a constitutional officer, such as the Attorney General or a U.S. Attorney. However, in Smith’s case, the Department of Justice regulations have deliberately insulated him from such management, thereby violating the Constitution. Davis highlighted another constitutional violation, pointing out that Smith’s office has an unlimited budget, which contravenes the Appropriations Clause.

“Only Congress can appropriate, and to give this appointee, who’s not even an officer, unlimited jurisdiction and unlimited power with an unlimited budget is clearly unconstitutional,” Davis argued.

The discussion also touched upon the precedent for special counsels and how Smith’s appointment deviates from it. In response to Harnwell’s question about whether there is any precedent for a special counsel being Senate-confirmed, Davis explained, “We used to have the Office of the Independent Counsel created by statute, but after the Ken Starr investigation of Bill Clinton, Congress didn’t like it anymore, so they let it lapse. The Justice Department then decided to create the office of Special Counsel through regulation, bypassing the need for congressional approval, which is clearly unconstitutional.”

Davis predicted that if the case reaches the Supreme Court, the ruling would likely be in favor of Judge Cannon’s decision. He argued that Attorney General Merrick Garland could have avoided this constitutional issue by having a U.S. Attorney from the Southern District of Florida lead the investigation into Mar-a-Lago instead of appointing Jack Smith. Davis went on to describe Smith as a “partisan hack,” pointing out his history of targeting Republican figures like former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell with what Davis characterized as “bogus charges” that were later overturned by the Supreme Court.

Harnwell and Davis also discussed how this case might impact the upcoming elections. Davis suggested that the ongoing legal actions against Trump and his associates could galvanize his supporters and influence voter turnout. “If we’re on this current trajectory, as long as we get out Trump supporters and voters early, Trump’s going to win,” Davis predicted.

Davis warned of the dangers of allowing such unchecked power within the executive branch. He posed a hypothetical scenario where a future president could create an all-powerful office akin to Smith’s, warning, “Do Democrats really think that if Trump or any other Republican were in office, they’d want someone like Jack Smith with unlimited power and no accountability? It’s a dangerous precedent.”

Watch the full Mike Davis segment on Monday’s WarRoom:

Mike Davis: “President Trump’s Going To Get Rid Of Jack Smith And Then Open A Probe On Jack Smith”