Professor Joel Johnson Quoted in "For Judge in Trump Documents Case, Unusual Rulings are Business as Usual" -- New York Times

Professor Joel S. Johnson is quoted in the New York Times article, "For Judge in Trump Documents Case, Unusual Rulings are Business as Usual."  Professor Johnson comments on the implications of Judge Aileen Cannon's granting of requests by amici curiae to present oral argument during the hearing on a challenge to the appoinment of the special counsel, Jack Smith. Judge Cannon presides over the classified documents case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. 

Excerpt from "For Judge in Trump Documents Case, Unusual Rulings are Business as Usual"

In another unusual move, Judge Cannon is allowing three lawyers who have filed what are known as amicus or friend-of-the-court briefs to argue in front of her for 30 minutes each. While these outside parties — referred to as “amici” — are commonly permitted to make their case directly to judges in appellate courts like the Supreme Court, that is not the standard practice in trial courts.

“The fact that Judge Cannon granted the amici request for oral argument seems to suggest that she is seriously considering the constitutional argument against the appointment of the special counsel,” said Joel S. Johnson, an associate professor at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law.

The complete article may be found at New York Times