Last week I wrote about Trump’s lawsuit requesting a special master to screen the Mar-a-Lago documents. To recap, his lawsuit was based on the outlandish claim that he had the right to possess the documents, a mindboggling claim given that most of the documents seized by the FBI were government documents, which, by law, must be housed in the National Archives. Moreover, about 100 of them were classified.
The Judge Ruled for Trump
Yup. You read that right. On Monday, Judge Cannon gave Trump his special master. The ruling is here. One of her reasons? “To ensure at least the appearance of fairness and integrity under the extraordinary circumstances presented.”
She then temporarily halted the criminal investigation until the special master finished screening the documents:
The order is somewhat unclear. The DOJ is not allowed to “review” or “use the seized materials for investigative purposes” — but what the heck does that mean, given that the review is completed? Presumably, she meant that the government cannot use the information from the documents to continue its investigation, but what if they don’t actually need the documents to do that? What if they have moved past reviewing the documents and are on to questioning witnesses about something other than the content of the documents?
She then went on to say that the national security review could continue:
The problem is that it is not possible to segregate the criminal investigation from the national security investigation. For one thing, the FBI is part of the national security division. Moreover, the national security investigation is likely to uncover crimes. Thus it isn’t possible to enjoin the criminal investigation while allowing the national security investigation to continue.
Some of the rationale she gave was silly and clearly singled Trump out for special treatment. For example, she said that Trump, because he is a former president, deserves extra protection from something that might “stigmatize” him:
One reason this is silly: Trump himself is the one who made this all public. Also, what about all the other people who feel stigmatized by searches? Nobody else gets shielded from the stigma of a search if there was probable cause for the warrant. Everyone else has to wait for an indictment, at which time they can challenge the legality of the search by filing a motion to suppress.
About executive privilege, she basically says the issue isn’t as cut and dried as the government says it is. But even if Trump does have executive privilege claims (he doesn’t) the place to resolve conflicts over executive privilege is in the D.C. Courts because the Presidential Records Act specifically says that disputes about executive privilege are to be settled in D.C.
She then ordered the parties to meet and confer and submit possible names for a special master. A joint filing was due Friday night.
Then came the bombshell reporting that the documents seized from Mar-a-Lago included another nation’s nuclear secrets
On Tuesday, The Washington Post reported that:
The DOJ filed a notice of appeal
On Thursday, the DOJ filed a notice of appeal signaling their intent to appeal Judge Cannon’s order granting the special master.
Next, the DOJ filed a Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal
This is where the action is. Even an expedited appeal can take at least a few weeks and possibly months to resolve. One solution when an appeal or trial will take too long, and in the meantime irreparable damage can be done, is to ask for a “stay pending appeal” which maintains the status quo as the appeal is pending.
The DOJ’s Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal is here.
What the DOJ did was clever: Instead of asking for a stay for all 11,000+ documents seized from Mar-a-Lago, the DOJ asked only that the 100 documents with classified markings be exempted from the order while the appeal is pending. This was clever because all the arguments that the DOJ made with regard to all the government documents are much easier to make (and much clearer) with regard to classified documents. For example:
- Trump cannot reasonably (or legally) assert ownership over classified documents (but some of the documents taken from his office he does actually own and will get back).
- Trump cannot reasonably (or legally) assert any sort of privilege over classified documents.
- Trump cannot claim any personal harm from a temporary stay pending appeal for these documents because he doesn’t own them.
The DOJ included with its motion an affidavit from Alan Kohler, the Assistant Director of the Counterintelligence Division of the FBI. In a signed declaration, he explained that the FBI is really the only part of the intelligence community that can investigate and recover government secrets that have been improperly retained out in the wild by using grand jury subpoenas and other tools. Such reviews are necessary, he explained, given how sensitive these papers are. For example, the government needed to find out if any of the documents had been compromised. While this is necessary for national security, if Trump compromised those documents, he will have more criminal liability. He explained that preventing immediate investigation of those 100 documents by law enforcement would cause irreparable harm to national security.
Because the DOJ is only asking to temporarily exempt those 100 documents, they are giving the court an off-ramp: Cannon can still give Trump his special master for the other 10,000+ documents. The DOJ just needs to continue its work with those 100 documents.
The DOJ also told the court this:
The government respectfully requests that the Court rule on this motion promptly. If the Court does not grant a stay by Thursday, September 15, the government intends to seek relief from the Eleventh Circuit.
So you can see how the DOJ is proceeding. First, they are asking the lower court (Judge Cannon) to issue the stay pending appeal. If the lower court refuses, they will ask the Eleventh Circuit (the appeals court for that district) to issue a stay pending appeal. If that fails, they will take it expedited to the Supreme Court.
Getting the stay seems like a slam dunk because how on earth can Trump claim the right to possess classified documents? And how can a district court judge tell the National Security division of the Department of Justice that they can’t continue their work assessing whether crimes have been committed with classified documents owned by the government?
Then, in the Friday night court filing, Trump dug in and insisted he has an “absolute right of access” to the classified documents, and the absolute right to control who can handle these documents.
I am not joking. In the Friday filing ordered by the court (it was due before midnight) Trump said this:
If any seized document is a Presidential record, Plaintiff has an absolute right of access to it while access by others, including those in the executive branch, has specified limitations. Thus, Trump (and/or his designee) cannot be denied access to those documents, which in this matter gives legal authorization to the Special Master to engage in first-hand review.
A “presidential record” is defined as a record generated during his presidency.
So he claims the “absolute” right to access these classified documents. He also claims he is the one who controls who has access to them. He thinks that he can order highly sensitive documents to be handed to a special master of his choosing. He also thinks he can prevent the national security team of the FBI from accessing them.
In fact, the Presidential Records Act limits a former president’s access to the records.
It’s clear what defense he intends to bring: If he does indeed have the authority to decide who has access to these documents and where they can have access, he can give himself that authority, which means he was within the law when he took them with him to Mar-a-Lago.
At least the legal issue is clear: Does Trump, a former president, retain the power to control the classified documents generated during his administration, or is he an ordinary citizen without such power?
Will the courts let Trump get away with this?
The lower court judge Eileen Cannon (who journalist Marcy Wheeler calls the Loose Cannon) may go along, but there are higher courts. Here is why I don’t think the higher courts will let him get away with this:
- Even the justices that he appointed refused to go along with his election fraud cases. At that point, they could have handed him the election–but they didn’t. Keeping him in the White House by going along with his bogus claims would have literally created a dictator because at that point, there would be no stopping anything he wanted to do. They might have preferred Trump to Biden, but they didn’t want a dictator and they didn’t want to entirely abandon rationality and law.
- Letting a former president control the classified documents generated while he was president is almost as crazy.
Moreover, what if Trump has classified documents stashed somewhere else. Handing him this power would be to give him free rein to do whatever he wanted with sensitive national secrets he may have stashed elsewhere. It would also allow future presidents to walk away with all of America’s sensitive secrets and do what they want with them. A former president could give himself power equal to a sitting president because he would control America’s secrets.
Trump Tries To Create His Own Reality
This description is from Yale professor Timothy Snyder: Trump writes a script and tries to force everyone to become actors in his show. The script after November 2020 was that he won. Now the script is, “I had the right to possess those documents.”
Fortunately, Trump generally loses in court.
We may be in for a nail-biting few weeks, but ultimately I have a hard time believing the courts will let him pull this off.
Judge Cannon’s jurisdiction is premised on the idea that there are no legal remedies available now to Trump because the only way he can challenge the legality of the search is after an indictment when he can bring a motion to suppress the evidence.
Her jurisdictional arguments are weak at best, but she marched through the analysis and decided she has grounds for equitable jurisdiction. I would expect the DOJ to appeal this, but their immediate concern is to exempt the 100 classified docs from her order.
And now, you probably need some dog content.
Have you ever had a zoom call with your dog?
Here is how it happened. My husband was helping me get set up for an appearance on a show, so he called me from his Zoom account to make sure the lighting was okay . . . when I joined the meeting, there was JJ, on his lookout perch, where he provides 24-hour security service . . . well, most of the time.
You can see his ears are perked up. Trust me: If a delivery truck comes within a block of the house, he will be back on duty.
Sometimes it seems that Trump’s filings besides being mostly nonsense are kind of low key confessions to the crimes he will be accused of pretty soon. Are these things admissible in a court?
Yes, you are correct. He is not contesting the fact that he possessed them, and that is enough for a conviction under certain statutes.
He is arguing that he did it, but his behavior was justified. It isn’t. But that’s what he’s going for.
And I love the doggie too!
Thank you for all the work you put into your explanations that even a legal novice such as myself can understand.
You’re offering a wonderful service here, Teri. Informed (and wanna-be informed) citizens THANK YOU for all the time and trouble you’ve taken in sharing your considerable expertise with us.
And I agree with Randy’s comment above. You’re a much-needed one-stop Info Shop!
Take care and all the best from Austria!
When you’re a former president, they let you do it. You can do anything.
I am unclear on how long all of these processes take? In a what-if scenario: Suppose Donald Trump should win the presidential election in 2024, what can he do to stop or reverse the process? What could he do do remove or lessen his culpability? I would hate to see all of this hard work turned upside down. Thank you for all of the rational, logical response to the issues; it is so hard to find these days.
In a what-if scenario, Trump winning the 2024 would be such a disaster that whatever happens or doesn’t happen in the criminal justice system wouldn’t matter at all. If Trump legitimately wins the 2024 election, it would mean that a large enough percentage of Americans actually don’t want democracy.
If he wins, it won’t matter what stage the investigation is in because he would simply pardon himself.
Well that’s downright depressing! Especially when you consider that it might not actually be decided by a “large enough percentage of Americans” since if I’ve calculated correctly, had Trump received only about 65,000 more votes in just the right states he would have won the electoral collage vote. I suppose it’s even possible he could have lost the popular vote by many more votes (again in the just the right states) and still won the electoral collage. Given the gerrymandering, election rule changes and the make up of the Supreme Court I’m not as confident as I’d like to be.
Gerrymandering doesn’t affect a presidential election. The electoral college is tipped in the favor of Republicans but it shouldn’t be close enough for it to matter. Given what we know about the Republicans I really think they should be losing by larger majorities.
Thanks Teri for helping us stay sane. I missed the late Friday assertion of “absolute access and control”, it makes Nixon’s claim of “When the President does it, it’s OK” look like grade school behavior. I’m thinking Trump’s claim is also intended to cover the missing documents. He knows something and is desperately trying to prevent others from finding out, is my suspicion. Let alone all the criminal culpability. Nice to see you and your crack security team in top form for zoom…
Excellent explanation as always! JJ seems to be as important to your readers as much as your expertise! Why can’t trump just fade away as other presidents do after their presidency? Lol
There might be far more advanced planning, execution, and wider involvement to Trump’s stealing those government documents than we could possibly know. For all we know, he could have been moving them for some time for who knows what purpose. Even if he had the right to VIEW those classified documents as a former president (which he doesn’t unless the current president allows it – and no way President Biden would allow it), he never had the right to take them out of their secure, government storage location. On that there is no doubt (and I say this as one who spent my career as a government contractor working in national defense).
Clearly Judge Cannon supports the former president. The timing of her confirmation (after Trump lost the 2020 election) combined with her inexperience make her appointment suspicious to begin with. Her rulings go much further than personally supporting the former president though given their lack of legal basis and obvious fealty to him seemingly inventing “privileges” that don’t exist. They make it appear that she’s in on this somehow. Either that, or her inexperience has made her vulnerable to acting on her personal loyalties and preferences rather than according to the rule of law, a dangerous thing for any judge.
The DOJ was very clever in their filing giving her an off-ramp to walk back the most outrageous aspects of her ruling. If she refuses, well, it’s encouraging that the higher courts can fix this and likely will as you note, despite the time that would take. It’s encouraging that the higher courts, despite some of their members’ support for the former president, still followed the law with respect to the Big Lie. That bodes well for these clear violations if they get that far.
When this is over, do you think that Judge Cannon will face any type of judicial inquiry? After all, there are ethical standards that bind every legal practitioner (short of the Supreme Court anyway) be they an attorney or a judge.
Judges make terrible decisions all the time. I had some rulings against some of my clients that were so wrong they would make your hair stand up on end (at least they did mine.) I remember one judge who was ordinarily very good, but one time he just lost it and, well, I don’t go into the details. The only solution moving forward is to make sure to keep Democrats in power long enough to appoint enough appellate and SCOTUS justices so that the higher courts can put a stop to this kind of nonsense.
Oh yes – and we all need to do all we can to ensure every eligible voter votes in this year’s midterms and every election hence. We need to ensure that the higher courts follow the law to at least have bad decisions reversed on appeal. The problem of course is the time that takes, and with the national security risks we currently face, that could be a problem depending on what happens next. While I think those who support the rule of law are legitimately concerned about the current SCOTUS majority’s going off the rails with many of their recent decisions (and potential future decisions such as Moore v. Harper), even they shot down the Big Lie, so there seem to some lines even they won’t cross … yet. It’s scary right now, but I appreciate your calm, clear explanations of what’s happening in the midst of all of this chaos. It helps a lot.
I am very grateful to you for all of this work!
You are calming me down quite a bit.
Wow. While slow and steady may win the race this is beginning to look like a locomotive bearing down on the ex prez. Thanks for keeping it all clear!
I love your security system.
Thank you so much for everything you do to explain these processes, Teri. It’s so reassuring to have this information laid out so clearly and it makes it easy to share it with friends and family who feel anxious about what’s happening.
Even someone providing 24/7 security service needs to sleep. 😀 😀 Thank you for helping to keep us informed with the truth.
Hi Teri — I am a huge fan. I have a question about one sentence in the piece: “ For example, the government needed to find out if any of the documents had been compromised. While this is necessary for national security, if Trump compromised those documents, he will have more criminal liability. Thus he explained that further investigation of those 100 documents by law enforcement would cause irreparable harm to national security.”
Is there a word missing? It feels like it should be “preventing or staying further investigation. . .would cause irreparable harm.” Am I reading this incorrectly?”
Thanks for all you do (including dog content!).
Thanks. I think I fixed it.
Wow, Teri. Nice tight ball of wax there (no pun intended). So nice to get a read-out of everything, and everything in its place, all at once. Instead of sifting through all these news sites to get 1/3 or 1/2 of the whole story.
Thank you,
R
Goodness I didn’t realize I posted this already. I’m still adding to it. (I’ll send out the email tonight)
Teri, I check into your site daily to re-read some things and see what’s new. You have been warned! I love the dog content as well.
R