U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon's July 15, 2024 dismissal order can be found here: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.672.0_2.pdf
"The Department of Justice (DOJ) authorized [Jack] Smith to appeal the decision to the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals...." - https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/jack-smith-responds-after-aileen-cannon-ruling/ar-BB1q2iUg
I decided to close the question in nine months because this seems like plenty of time for a high-profile case like this.
Related questions
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/26/jack-smith-appeal-trump-classified-documents-case-00176380
“Congress has granted the Attorney General not only the power to appoint special counsels, but discretion to determine how much independence to give them,” Smith and his colleagues wrote in a brief that traces the history of such appointments back to the 1805s.
Attorney General Merrick Garland is mentioned in the article:
“For more than 20 years, I was a federal judge. Do I look like somebody who would make that basic mistake about the law? I don’t think so,” Garland told NBC News. “Our position is that it’s constitutional and valid. That’s why we appealed.”
“I will say that this was the same process of appointing special counsel as was followed in the previous administration,” the attorney general added. “Until now, every single court including the Supreme Court that has considered the legality of a special counsel appointment has upheld it.”
From today's WSJ piece titled "Jack Smith, You’re Fired" by William McGurn.
Here’s the Jack Smith dilemma: There’s no law establishing the special counsel—and he was appointed under Justice Department regulations. Nor has Mr. Smith been confirmed by the Senate. So we have the anomaly of a private citizen who enjoys vastly more power than any ordinary U.S. attorney, including virtually unlimited funding with little accountability.
This is misleading and irrelevant to the legal case.
McGurn has worked as a speechwriter, writer, and editor for right-of-center organizations and candidates. He doesn't have a legal background. It is not in McGurn's ideological groove nor financial interest to speak accurately and candidly about the legal issues at play.
From the LegalEagle YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/NmqcH-Xnvi4
"[Aileen Cannon's decision] is a completely bonkers made-up decision that flies in the face of the Constitution, Federal Statutes, Supreme Court authority (on point) and Federal Appeals Court decisions that are directly on point. It is partisan decision that has no chance of being upheld by the 11th Circuit. ... based on current law this decision is nuts."
Cannon ruled that Smith's appointment as special counsel overseeing Trump's federal indictments was a violation of the U.S. constitution's appointments clause, which mandates how federal officials are hired.
She also ruled that Smith's appointment was a violation of the appropriations clause, which mandates how taxpayers' money is spent.
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-jack-smith-aileen-cannon-florida-court-appeal-1927503
From what I understand, these claims fly in the face of precedent.
“The dismissal of the case deviates from the uniform conclusion of all previous courts to have considered the issue that the Attorney General is statutorily authorized to appoint a Special Counsel,” Peter Carr, spokesman for Smith’s office, said in a statement Monday.