This legal team had previously requested Judge Cannon to step down from the case last week, citing concerns over “an appearance of partiality.” They argued that Trump’s past commendations of her rulings in a separate criminal matter, where he faces allegations of improperly retaining classified documents, further complicate her impartiality. In a surprising ruling in July, Judge Cannon dismissed all charges against Trump, asserting—contrary to longstanding legal standards—that Jack Smith, the special counsel behind the indictment, had been improperly appointed.

In their latest court filing, Routh’s defense lawyers highlighted additional grounds for questioning Judge Cannon’s ability to remain unbiased. They referenced a report from ABC News that indicated her name had surfaced on an internal Trump campaign document, which listed potential candidates for key legal positions within the Justice Department and the White House Counsel’s Office.

The defense argued, “In the mind of the public, the fact that Mr. Trump appointed your honor may contribute to the perception of partiality, especially considering his public admiration for your previous rulings.” They further noted, “Should Trump return to the presidency, he would possess the authority to promote your honor to a federal appellate court, including the prestigious U.S. Supreme Court, or appoint her to significant roles within the executive branch.”

As of now, Judge Cannon has not publicly responded to the defense’s request or the email seeking her comment on these allegations.