APPOINTMENT WASN'T CONSTITUTIONAL. SMITH HAS INDICATED HE PLANS TO APPEAL THIS DECISION. JOINING US NOW, NBC NEWS JUSTICE AND INTELLIGENCE CORRESPONDENT KEN DILANIAN. KEN, LAY OUT THE RULING AND THE POSSIBLE PATHS FORWARD FROM HERE. >> YEAH, AS YOU SAID, ANA, JACK SMITH INDICATED HE WILL APPEAL THIS STUNNING RULING. HIS SPOKESMAN SAID IN A STATEMENT THAT, QUOTE, THE DISMISSAL OF THIS CASE DEVIATES FROM THE UNIFORM CONCLUSION OF ALL PREVIOUS COURTS TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE ISSUE. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AUTHORIZED A SPECIAL COUNSEL TO APPEAL THE COURT'S ORDER. IN FACT, ANA, EIGHT SEPARATE JUDGES HAVE REJECTED THE CLAIM THAT JUDGE AILEEN CANNON ENDORSED IN THIS DECISION, HOLDING THAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL AND OTHERS HAVE BEEN UNLAWFULLY -- THIS SPECIAL COUNSEL AND OTHERS HAVE BEEN UNLAWFULLY APPOINTED. IT IS IMPORTANT TO SAY THAT THIS RULING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MERITS OF THE CASE. THERE'S NOTHING IN IT ABOUT CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS OR OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. IT DISMISSED CASE ENTIRELY ON TECHNICAL GROUNDS. IN PLAIN LANGUAGE, SHE RULED THAT SPECIAL COUNSELS EXERCISE SO MUCH POWER, THERE EITHER MUST BE A LAW TO ESTABLISH THE OFFICE, WHICH THERE ISN'T RIGHT NOW, OR THAT THEY SHOULD BE APPOINTED BY THE PRESIDENT AND CONFIRMED BY THE SENATE. WHAT THIS RULING DOES IS UPENDS A SYSTEM THE DOJ HAS BEEN USING FOR 25 YEARS. IT'S BEEN UPHELD BY THE COURTS CONSISTENTLY THROUGH THE TIME. IT EVEN GOES BACK FURTHER THAN THAT TO WATERGATE, WHEN THE SUPREME COURT SAID IT WAS OKAY TO APPOINT A SPECIAL COUNSEL. JUDGE AILEEN CANNON SAID THIS WAS DICTA, MEANING IT WASN'T BINDING ON HER. NOW, WE'LL HAVE TO SEE WHAT THE APPEALS COURT DOES WITH THIS CASE. NOW, DOJ HAS ONE OTHER OPTION IN ADDITION TO APPEALING. THEY COULD HAVE THE U.S. ATTORNEY IN MIAMI RE-FILE THE CASE IN FLORIDA, BUT IT IS NOT CLEAR THEY'RE GOING TO GO IN THAT DIRECTION. >> KEN DILANIAN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BREAKING IT DOWN FOR US. JOINING US NOW IS FORMER ASSISTANT MANHATTAN ATTORNEY AND LEGAL ANALYST CATHERINE CHRISTIAN. WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF JUDGE CANNON'S RULING? >> WELL, IT WAS VERY SURPRISING. IT WAS UNEXPECTED. WHAT MANY OF US EXPECTED, THAT SHE'D CONTINUE TO DRAG OUT THE CASE AND ALLOW THE DEFENSE TO KEEP FILING MOTIONS, BUT IT WAS REALLY SHOCKING. AS KEN SAID, EIGHT DIFFERENT JUDGES ALREADY RULED THE OPPOSITE WAY. THIS HAS BEEN THE WAY YOU CHOOSE A SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR MORE THAN TWO DECADES. IT'S GOING TO BE GOING TO THE 11th CIRCUIT. I DO NOT THINK THEY'LL RE-FILE IT AGAIN BECAUSE YOU'LL JUST GET PROBABLY JUDGE CANNON AGAIN. I THINK THE SPECIAL COUNSEL KNEW THIS WAS NOT GOING TO BE TRIED BEFORE THE ELECTION, SO WHY NOT APPEAL SNIT. >> WALK US THROUGH WHAT THE APPEALS PROCESS WOULD LOOK LIKE AND HOW LONG IT COULD TAKE. >> IT'S GOING TO TAKE A WHILE. BECAUSE IT'S ALSO GOING TO GO TO THE SUPREME COURT. WHAT DO I MEAN BY THAT? IF THE 11th CIRCUIT OVERTURNS JUDGE CANNON, DONALD TRUMP'S ATTORNEYS ARE GOING TO TRY TO SEEK CERT IN THE SUPREME COURT. THE SUPREME COURT WILL PROBABLY TAKE IT. BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NEXT JUNE OR JULY, WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY CASE. OF COURSE, IF DONALD TRUMP IS RE-ELECTED AS PRESIDENT, BOTH FEDERAL CASES, I AM CERTAIN, WILL GO AWAY. >> OKAY. SO YOU MENTIONED THE OTHER CASE. THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION. HOW DOES THIS RULING POTENTIALLY IMPACT JACK SMITH'S OTHER CASE, WHICH, OF COURSE, IS THE ELECTION INTERFERENCE CASE? IS THERE ANY CONNECTION OR IMPACT? BECAUSE JUDGE CHUTKAN IN THAT CASE ALSO HAD LOOKED AT THIS VERY SAME ISSUE AND RULED DIFFERENTLY. >> EXACTLY. SO IT DOESN'T AFFECT THAT CASE UNLESS IT EVENTUALLY GOES TO THE SUPREME COURT, AND THE SUPREME COURT DOES WHAT JUSTICE THOMAS HAS SAID. IN HIS CONCURRENCE, THOUGH NO ONE BROUGHT UP THE ISSUE, HE'S THE ONE WHO SAID, YOU KNOW, IS THE SPECIAL COUNSEL EVEN LAWFUL? WHICH IS, I THINK, WHAT GAVE JUDGE CANNON, YOU KNOW, THE GREEN LIGHT TO ISSUE HER DECISION. SO JUDGE CHUTKAN AND SEVEN OTHER JUDGES HAVE RULED THE DIRECT OPPOSITE OF WHAT JUDGE CANNON HAS. IT DOESN'T AFFECT JACK SMITH UNLESS AND UNTIL THE SUPREME COURT DECIDES THAT JUDGE CANNON WAS RIGHT. >> SPEAKING OF THE SUPREME COURT, THIS COVER OF "THE NEW YORKER" IS GETTING SOME EYEBALLS. IT SHOWS TRUMP'S LIKENESS IN PLACE OF ALL THE CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES ON THAT COURT. SUPREME COURT HAS REALLY LED TO MANY LEGAL WINS NOW FOR TRUMP LATELY. FIRST, OF COURSE, THE RULING THAT TRUMP IS PROTECTED WITH PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY FOR OFFICIAL ACTS, WHICH LED TO THE DELAY IN SENTENCING FOR HIS HUSH MONEY VERDICT. NOW, YOU HAVE JUDGE CANNON DISMISSING THE CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS CASE BASED, IN PART, ON JUDGE THOMAS' CONCURRING OPINION IN THE PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY CASE. HOW MANY MORE RIPPLE EFFECTS COULD WE SEE FROM THOSE DECISIONS? >> MANY MORE. ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. PRESIDENTS ARE THE ONES WHO APPOINT FEDERAL JUDGES. TO THE APPELLATE COURT AND THE SUPREME COURT. DONALD TRUMP APPOINTED THREE. I THINK JUDGE BARRETT IS SORT OF A WILD CARD BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T RULE AS ALWAYS EXPECTED.
