U.S. Federal Court Bars Public Disclosure of Special Counsel Report on Trump

Email: online@newsofbahrain.com

A federal judge has permanently barred the public release of a special counsel’s report detailing President Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents after leaving the White House before he was re-elected, fuelling controversy over transparency and legal precedent in high-profile investigations. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, issued the ruling on February 23, 2026, granting a request from Trump and his former co-defendants to keep the report sealed.

The document at issue was prepared by Jack Smith, the former special counsel who led a criminal probe into Trump’s alleged retention of national defense documents at his Mar‑a‑Lago estate and obstruction of efforts to recover them. That investigation produced a two-volume report before charges were dismissed in 2024 after Cannon ruled Smith was unlawfully appointed.

In her decision, Cannon said releasing the report particularly Volume II, which focuses on the classified documents case would cause a “manifest injustice” because the underlying prosecution was dismissed without a conviction and Trump and co-defendants maintain their presumption of innocence. She also pointed to rules governing grand jury secrecy and protective orders as reasons the material should remain under seal.

The Justice Department under Attorney General Pam Bondi had already classified the report as an internal, confidential document not suitable for release, a position supported by Trump’s legal team, who characterised Smith’s investigation as illegitimate due to his appointment status.

Critics of the ruling including transparency advocates such as American Oversight and the Knight First Amendment Institute have condemned Cannon’s order as an attack on the public’s right to know and inconsistent with First Amendment principles. They argue that withholding the investigative findings keeps powerful information about government actions secret from citizens who funded the probe.

While the decision can be appealed, Cannon’s ruling marks a major development in the ongoing legal aftermath of the classified documents case. It leaves unresolved whether substantial portions of Smith’s work will ever be released to the public or lawmakers, even as similar special counsel reports in other high-profile matters have historically been made available.