When federal officials decided to bring the most significant prosecution in Justice Department history to Florida instead of Washington, D.C., they knew they were taking a risk.

One is a generally less sophisticated and favorable group of judges, of which Aileen Cannon is by far the most concerning.

Cannon is the Trump appointee who allowed the former president to temporarily derail the investigation of classified documents with a civil suit against the search of his Mar-a-Lago estate. Her statements on that episode were hopelessly garbled and result-oriented, prompting two hard reversals by the conservative

US

11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which finally ended the setback.

Sure enough, through a seemingly random process, the nightmare scenario seems to have come true: Cannon is the alleged president of the United States vs. Trump.

Some have already called on Cannon to withdraw from the case based on her apparent past partiality. Judges’ challenges are governed by a number of rules, beginning with a provision that instructs a judge to refrain from any proceedings in which [her] impartiality can be reasonably questioned. That guideline is meant to apply even if Cannon genuinely believes she can handle the job.

It would arguably make sense for Cannon to pull herself out, even from her personal point of view: She’s in a no-win situation where her already abysmal professional reputation will likely only suffer more. But based on her record in the previous doubling event, even after humiliating reversals, it’s hard to trust that she’ll willingly step aside.

If Cannon stays on the case, there are both formal and informal ways the 11th Circuit Court can remove her from the case. Unless and until that happens, her presence poses concrete risks of disrupting the functioning of the justice system when the country urgently needs it to be beyond reproach.

Here are five areas in which Cannon, more than almost any other judge in the country, can wreak terrible havoc on prosecutors.

Timing: Special Counsel Jack Smith stressed the importance of a speedy trial in his brief remarks last week, and under normal circumstances this case could go to trial next summer. The most concerning prospect of Cannon’s assignment is that she will yield to Trump’s well-known delaying tactics and allow the trial to be postponed beyond the 2024 election. That would be a serious disservice to deserving voters to know if Trump is guilty of the charge when they cast their vote. Jury Selection: There are bound to be potential jurors in Florida’s Southern District who would never vote to convict Trump. The court ultimately determines whether a juror is able to set aside her prejudices and apply the law. Given her shown sympathy for the former president, Cannon could eventually give way to ardent Trump supporters who would punch other judges, leading to a hung jury. Evidentiary Statements: The judge can make a number of evidentiary statements that would make sentencing a steeper climb. The main one would relate to former Trump attorney Evan Corcorans’ notes and statements of both the former president and his alleged co-conspirator, Walt Nauta. Corcoran’s testimony regarding the defendants’ statements should be admissible under federal rules of evidence, but Cannon could limit or prevent its use. Jury Instructions: Judges have a lot of leeway in guiding the jury’s deliberations. The final stage of a court case before concluding arguments is a conference of instruction in which the judge decides on high-profile disputes between the parties. And just like with questions of evidence, an erroneous verdict leading to an acquittal cannot be reversed because dual risk protection would prevent a new trial. Trump Public Comment: The day after the indictment was unsealed, Trump proclaimed that the ridiculous and baseless charge against me by the armed Department of Injustice of the Biden administration will go down as one of the most heinous abuses of power in the history of our country.’ “In the criminal case against Trump in New York, the presiding judge immediately warned the defendant to watch his public remarks. If Cannon refuses to curb Trump’s vitriol, he could prejudice the jury and create danger.” government and judicial personnel, and bring chaos to a process we desperately need to be dignified and orderly.

There are nearly 700 federal district court judges in the country. Of all of them, Cannon is the first whose honesty can reasonably be questioned. And of all the cases in the federal court system, none call for a judge and process that inspires more public confidence than this one. It is of the utmost importance that this case be assigned to another judge.

Harry Litman is the host of the

Talking Feds podcast

.

@harrylitman