Certainly! Here's a revised version of the content that is plagiarism-free and unique:
Prosecutors and attorneys representing Donald Trump submitted their respective hypothetical jury instructions in a classified-document case, revealing significant disagreements over the interpretation of key legal issues in the case against the former president.
This follows U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon's order in Florida for both sides to outline hypothetical jury instructions based on their differing interpretations of two relevant laws.
Special counsel Jack Smith strongly opposed the judge's approach, calling the jury instructions based on a "fundamentally flawed legal premise" and indicating a possible appeal if the judge rules against him. Legal experts find Judge Cannon's focus on jury instructions unusual, as a trial is not imminent, and there are several pretrial decisions to be made before the instructions become relevant.
They also criticize Cannon for entertaining what they consider distorted interpretations of laws supported by Trump's legal team and allies.
In their response, the government expressed frustration with the instructions and urged Judge Cannon to promptly decide on key legal questions to avoid delaying the trial.
They cautioned against adopting Trump's interpretations of the laws, stating that doing so would "distort the trial."
Trump's legal team argued that the case should focus on his official acts as president, not on the illegal retention of materials.
They emphasized that the Presidential Records Act (PRA) allows presidents to designate documents as personal at the end of their presidency, a point contested by prosecutors who argue that the Espionage Act, not the PRA, governs classified materials. Trump faces 32 counts of violating the Espionage Act for allegedly retaining classified documents after leaving office, as well as eight counts related to obstructing officials' efforts to retrieve the materials.
He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The dispute over jury instructions also revolves around the PRA, with prosecutors suggesting they may appeal if the PRA is intertwined with the Espionage Act in the instructions.
They maintain that the PRA should not play a role in the trial.
Trump's attorneys asserted that he had the authority to determine the designation of the documents in question and that his decisions while in office were legally appropriate uses of his authority.
Judge Cannon, who took the bench in late 2020, initially scheduled the trial to begin in May but is likely to push back the date. She has not yet ruled on a trial date, and her order for jury instructions follows a recent hearing on two of Trump's motions to dismiss the case, one of which argued that the PRA allowed him to declare classified documents as personal property.
Cannon rejected another motion to dismiss that claimed the Espionage Act was too vague to be used in his indictment.