The transcript is FBI interview with Trump’s valet Walt Nauta who is charged for allegedly mishandling classified documents stored at Mar-a-Lago estate.

A federal judge has allowed a Trump co-defendant in the classified documents case to file a redacted FBI interview transcript with his motion to dismiss, in a blow for special counsel Jack Smith.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon said in a paperless order on Wednesday there were “even stronger” reasons to deny Mr. Smith’s “sweeping” request to overcome the public’s “common-law interest in access to these materials.”

The material in question is the transcript of an FBI interview with Trump co-defendant Walt Nauta, who was charged for allegedly mishandling classified documents stored at the former president’s Mar-a-Lago estate in southern Florida.

Ahead of a hearing slated for Friday, Mr. Nauta has been ordered to file his motions for a bill of particulars or to dismiss by Thursday. A bill of particulars is a detailed statement of charges; the co-defendant has argued that the prosecution hasn’t made clear what laws he violated.

Mr. Nauta is expected to argue in motions to dismiss that the prosecution has failed to state an offense, that the law is too vague for the average citizen to understand, and that the law is too ambiguous, therefore the judge must apply the law in a manner favorable to the defendant, according to the order.

“Given the undisputedly substantive nature of the Motions, the Court has applied the common-law right of access standard to this inquiry, deeming it sufficient to resolve the instant requests as briefed,” the judge wrote.

Judge Cannon found there were “similar but even stronger reasons” to allow the FBI transcript to be filed, albeit with redactions to witness names.

“With respect to the substantive statements contained in Defendant Nauta’s FBI interview, the Court reaches a different conclusion,” the judge wrote.

“For similar but even stronger reasons than those articulated in the Court’s recent Order applying Rule 16 438—and after balancing the parties’ asserted interests in this case of significant public concern—the Court finds the Special Counsel’s sweeping request and generalized rationales inadequate to overcome the public’s common-law interest in access to these materials.

“Accordingly, Defendant Nauta may attach his FBI interview transcript but shall (for the reasons stated previously) redact the names of any potential government witnesses and ancillary names where referenced therein,” the judge wrote.

Additionally, the judge ordered that Mr. Nauta’s grand jury testimony taken on June 21, 2022, be filed entirely under seal “for now.”