A former federal prosecutor, Renato Mariotti, wrote that there is virtually "nothing" special counsel Jack Smith can do to speed the process up.

"Realistically there is nothing Jack Smith can do to move the Mar-a-Lago case forward to trial before the election. Judges have extremely broad discretion over their trial calendar, which is what gives Judge Cannon the ability to avoid setting a trial date at this time," Mr. Mariotti wrote on social media.

Another former federal prosecutor, Brandon Van Grack, wrote that Mr. Smith's team will have "a bumpy ride" ahead of them because of Judge Cannon's "numerous other scheduled hearings on pretrial motions" from President Trump and two co-defendants, which he indicates that Judge Cannon believes "have merit."

Harry P. Litman, a law professor and a former U.S. attorney, echoed those claims, saying that the case is now in a "deep freeze" after the latest order.

Meanwhile, multiple television legal analysts claimed that with her latest order, Judge Cannon is intentionally trying to delay the case. The Epoch Times contacted the court for comment.

"This is news but it's hardly unexpected. Judge Cannon seems desperate to avoid trying this case. This isn't justice. defendants aren't the only ones with speedy trial act rights, we the people have them too," wrote former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance, who currently works for MSNBC, on Tuesday afternoon.

But Tim Fitton, the head of the Judicial Watch legal group, wrote that complaints about Judge Cannon's decisions are unwarranted, arguing that such a timeline "is normal and not surprising."