Clarence Thomas gave Aileen Cannon 'faulty argument' to justify booting Jack Smith: expert

The U.S. Supreme Court severely weakened the election interference case against Donald Trump by granting partial immunity to the former president — and Justice Clarence Thomas may have given federal Judge Aileen Cannon ammunition to remove special counsel Jack Smith.

The former president's legal team argued last month before Cannon that Smith's appointment was unconstitutional, and Thomas wrote a concurring opinion in the immunity case that agrees with that view of the special counsel, which former federal prosecutor Chuck Rosenberg told MSNBC's "Morning Joe" was a specious argument.

"This is an issue that has been litigated many times, and each time, the courts of the United States have determined that special counsels like Jack Smith are constitutionally permitted, that their funding is constitutionally permitted [and] they still are inferior officers to the attorney general of the United States," Rosenberg said.

"Basically, no problem with the appointment of a special counsel, but this is an issue pending before Judge Cannon in the Southern District of Florida."

The immunity case challenged Trump's indictment in the District of Columbia election interference case, but Thomas seemingly bolstered arguments offered by the former president's attorneys and Republican former attorneys general Edwin Meese and Michael Mukasey in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case.

ALSO READ: NRA no longer 'human rights group' on Google

"I'm not quite sure why Justice Thomas did this, but he may have breathed some life into Mr. Trump's argument in front of Judge Cannon that Jack Smith was improperly, unconstitutionally appointed," Rosenberg said.

"That is not the law, that is not the case. If she rules that way, I imagine she would be overturned on appeal. but it is a pending issue. It seems to me that Justice Thomas was trying to give some sustenance to this argument. I believe it is a faulty argument. Every court that has examined it so far has found it to be a faulty argument."

Watch the video below or at this link.

- YouTube youtu.be