Former president Trump is on trial in federal court in Florida, having been indicted for illegally possessing documents related to national defense. The judge, Eileen Cannon, ordered both sides of the case to prepare draft jury instructions on the assumption that a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act, would give Trump a strong defense to the charges.

The prosecutor, Special Counsel Jack Smith, complied with the judge's instructions but sharply objected to the assumption that the PRA is relevant. Smith pointed out that if the court so instructs the jury, it would be virtually impossible for them to convict the president; they would have to acquit, and since jeopardy attaches once the jury has been selected, he could not be retried even if an appellate court would have found that it was a mistake to give the jury that instruction.

Smith suggested that the judge rule before trial as to whether the PRA is, in fact, a defense to these charges. The judge responded quickly and refused to do so.

Smith now has to choose whether to go to trial and hope that the judge eventually decides not to give the controversial jury instructions, or else seek a writ of mandamus from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The appellate court would then decide whether to compel Judge Cannon to make a ruling, make a ruling for her, or even remove her from the case.

Seeking a writ of mandamus would be an unusual step, but this case has many unusual features.

This market will resolve "YES" if Smith files a motion seeking a writ of mandamus from the 11th Circuit regarding the PRA and/or any jury instructions related to it. It will resolve "NO" if Cannon recuses or is otherwise removed from the case, rules on the PRA issue in a way that makes such a request irrelevant, or if trial begins without there having been such a request.

I may have to use my discretion to resolve this market and I will not wager in it.