Trump, U.S. prosecutors clash again over status of seized records
Send a link to a friend
[November 15, 2022]
By Sarah N. Lynch and Jacqueline Thomsen
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Justice
Department in a court filing unsealed on Monday accused Donald Trump's
lawyers of "gamesmanship" for arguing that some of the documents seized
by the FBI from the former president's Florida estate should be kept out
of a criminal investigation because they are "personal" or privileged.
Trump, who may announce a 2024 run for the presidency on Tuesday, has
fought to keep materials seized by FBI agents during a court-approved
Aug. 8 search at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach away from
investigators in their criminal probe involving sensitive government
records taken when he left office last year.
The newly unsealed filings by the Justice Department and Trump's lawyers
were made to U.S. Judge Raymond Dearie, an independent arbiter named to
review the seized documents to consider whether any should be walled off
from investigators.
The department's filing stated that Trump is claiming privilege over 122
documents taken in the federal raid. Prosecutors wrote that they should
then be allowed access to nearly 2,800 other papers that they are
currently blocked from reviewing as part of their investigation.
Under federal law, a president can retain personal records after leaving
office, but these must be unrelated to official work.
Trump's attorneys argued in their filing that he can unilaterally
determine that records are personal, that he does not need to provide
evidence that he made that determination, and that the decision cannot
be challenged. The Justice Department wrote in separate filings that
Trump cannot claim that government records are his personal papers
"simply by saying so" or "simply by the act of removing them from the
White House."
The filings, released with some parts blacked out, were initially made
under seal last Tuesday. It is not clear from the redacted court filings
exactly which documents Trump is claiming as personal. The Justice
Department has said that about 100 pages of the roughly 11,000 seized
records are marked as classified, and other court filings show that
government records were mixed in with items such as media clippings.
If Dearie, a so-called special master named to conduct a review of items
taken in the search, decides the papers are not personal, Trump's
lawyers said Dearie should instead find that they are covered by
executive privilege - still keeping them away from investigators. That
legal doctrine allows a president to keep certain documents or
information secret.
[to top of second column]
|
Former U.S. President Donald Trump
speaks at a rally to support Republican candidates ahead of midterm
elections, in Dayton, Ohio, U.S. November 7, 2022. REUTERS/Gaelen
Morse/File Photo
The department said Trump cannot assert executive privilege over any
documents he has claimed as personal records because any such
records must be unrelated to official duties.
"The Special Master should not indulge this type of gamesmanship,"
prosecutors wrote.
Prosecutors are looking into whether Trump broke federal law by
taking the records and also whether he obstructed the investigation
into the missing papers.
Two weeks after the search, Trump filed a civil lawsuit in an effort
to delay the investigation and keep some records from investigators
by asking a judge to appoint a special master to conduct a review on
whether any should be deemed privileged. U.S. District Judge Aileen
Cannon, a Trump appointee, named Dearie to the role.
Trump has stated on social media, without offering evidence, that he
declassified all of the records and that the FBI may have planted
evidence. Trump's attorneys have not made such arguments in any
official court filings.
The Justice Department is appealing Cannon's decision to appoint a
special master, telling the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals she overstepped her authority and that her ruling harmed the
investigation. Trump's legal team on Thursday filed papers arguing
that Dearie's review should move forward.
Cannon initially barred the department from using all of the seized
records for its criminal investigation until Dearie's review is
complete. The 11th Circuit then reversed a portion of Cannon's
order, ruling that she erred by blocking the department from
accessing the classified materials for its investigation.
(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch and Jacqueline Thomsen in Washington;
Editing by Will Dunham and Alistair Bell)
[© 2022 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|