Fox News Digital learned that the Justice Department has given Special Counsel permission to appeal U.S. district judge Aileen Cannon’s ruling on Monday dismissing classified records case against ex-President Trump.

“The dismissal is inconsistent with the conclusion reached by all courts that have previously considered the question of whether the Attorney General was statutorily authorized in appointing a Special Counsel. Peter Carr, a spokesperson for Smith’s Office, said that the Justice Department had authorized the Special Counsel’s appeal of the court’s decision.

Trump was charged with a number of crimes arising from Smith’s investigation regarding his possession and use of classified material at his Mar-a-Lago home. He pleaded no contest to all 37 counts of felony charges stemming from Smith’s investigation, including conspiracy to obstruct the justice, false statements, and willful retention or national defense information.

Cannon dismissed the case for Trump’s handling of classified documents. Some legal experts called this a “strongly-reasoned” opinion which eliminates the “greatest threat” that Trump faces.

She dismissed the superseding criminal indictment of Trump as well, saying it violated “the Appointments clause of the United States Constitution.”

Cannon released a 93 page opinion on Monday dismissing the case, citing that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s appointment to supervise the case was unconstitutional.

When Smith will officially appeal the decision is not clear.

Bretbaier, the Fox News anchor and executive editor for ‘Special Report With Bret Baier,’ said that Trump was “thrilled” that the judge had the courage to make the decision. This ruling has huge implications not only for this case, but also for others.

Trump said from Milwaukee, where the Republican National Convention was held this week. “This is an important, major deal. This only adds to the positive atmosphere of this convention. “This will be a fantastic week.”

The Appointments Clause states that “Ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court and all other officers of the United States are appointed by the president subject to the advice of and consent of Congress, although Congress can vest the appointment of lesser officers in the sole discretion of the President, the Courts of Law or the Heads of Departments.” Smith was, however, never confirmed by Senate.

Cannon wrote: “After careful consideration of the challenges raised in this Motion, the Court finds that Special Counsel Smith’s pursuit of this case violates two fundamental cornerstones in our constitutional scheme, namely the role Congress plays in the appointment and authorization of expenditures through law, as well as the role Congress plays in the nomination of constitutional officers.”

The Framers granted Congress a key role in the nomination of officers, both principal and subordinate. She continued, “This role cannot be usurped or diffused by the Executive Branch – in this case or another, or whether there is a heightened need for national security or not.”

“Congress has the power to determine whether it wants to give appointment authority to a head of department in cases of inferior officers. It’s done this in other legislative contexts.” Cannon said that despite the Special Attorney’s stretched statutory interpretations, it was clear that Congress did not act in this case.

She also stated that “it seems the Executive has grown more comfortable in recent years in appointing special counsels who are’regulatory,’ following an ad-hoc pattern without much judicial scrutiny.”

Earlier this week, Trump asked for a partial pause on the classified documents case following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that found presidents enjoy substantial immunity from official acts committed while in office.