In a renewed call for transparency, former special counsel Jack Smith has reached out to Congress with a request to publicly defend his prosecutions of former President Donald Trump. However, the extent to which he can divulge details about the Mar-a-Lago classified documents investigation remains uncertain, due to U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon’s decision to keep the report under wraps.

Smith’s letter, addressed to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan of Ohio and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa, was submitted on Thursday. In it, Smith expressed his willingness to clarify numerous “mischaracterizations” surrounding his investigations into the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and the Mar-a-Lago documents case during open hearings.

In a recent interview, Smith dismissed accusations from Trump and his supporters that he was pursuing a politically motivated vendetta against the former president as “absolutely ludicrous.”

Regarding the Mar-a-Lago investigation, which was dismissed by Judge Cannon on the grounds of Smith’s alleged unlawful appointment, the former special counsel emphasized the strength of the evidence. He stated, “We had substantial evidence” that Trump intentionally retained classified documents and obstructed efforts to retrieve them.

Smith highlighted evidence of obstruction, citing public statements by Trump claiming ownership of the documents and his refusal to return them despite government requests, even before any criminal investigation had started. These actions, Smith argued, demonstrated willful intent.

However, the ability of Smith to disclose more information is still under consideration by his legal team at Covington & Burling. They are cautious to avoid any potential repercussions that might arise from further disclosures.

“He is prepared to answer questions about the Special Counsel’s investigation and prosecution, but requires assurance from the Department of Justice that he will not be punished for doing so,” the letter said. “To that end, Mr. Smith needs guidance from the Department of Justice regarding federal grand jury secrecy requirements and authorization on the matters he may speak to regarding, among other things, Volume II of the Final Report of the Special Counsel, which is not publicly available.”

As Law&Crime has reported, Cannon, a Trump appointee, issued an injunction in January that blocked the release of Volume II, given that Trump’s former co-defendants, valet Waltine Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos de Oliveira, still had pending appeals.

Although those appeals in those scuttled cases were dismissed at the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in February, the injunction remains in place to the present day, despite repeat efforts by intervening groups — the Knight First Amendment Institute and American Oversight — to undo the block.

Multiple reminders about the groups’ attempted interventions have not moved Cannon to act. That inaction led another federal judge to reject the New York Times’ Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to obtain Volume II.

Most recently, both the Knight Institute and American Oversight sought writs of mandamus at the 11th Circuit in late September, asking the appellate court to force Cannon to rule on whether or not to lift the injunction, to at least open the door to an expedited appeal.

The Knight Institute supported its arguments by calling Cannon’s “six-month delay” — and counting — “manifestly unreasonable” and an affront to its “constitutional right of access to judicial records” that the public has a right to know about, given that Smith’s Mar-a-Lago report “addresses allegations of grave criminal conduct by the nation’s highest-ranking official.”

To date, the 11th Circuit has not acted either.