Trump lawyers oppose Justice Department effort to regain access to seized documents

Washington — Lawyers for former President Donald Trump on Monday urged a federal decide to proceed to block Justice Department investigators from reviewing greater than 100 delicate documents seized by the FBI throughout its search at Mar-a-Lago, the newest within the authorized back-and-forth between the previous president’s authorized staff and federal prosecutors.

In a 21-page response to a Justice Department request asking the court docket to raise a part of an order blocking using the documents for investigative functions, Trump’s lawyers known as the federal probe into his dealing with of delicate information “unprecedented and misguided,” and stated there’s “no indication any purported ‘classified records’ were disclosed to anyone.”

“Indeed, it appears such ‘classified records,’ along with the other seized materials, were principally located in storage boxes in a locked room at Mar-a-Lago, a secure, controlled access compound utilized regularly to conduct the official business of the United States during the Trump Presidency, which to this day is monitored by the United States Secret Service,” Trump’s authorized staff advised the court docket.

In a separate filing Monday afternoon, lawyers for the previous president additionally objected to the 2 candidates proposed by the Justice Department — retired judges Barbara Jones, who served on the U.S. District Court in Manhattan, and Thomas Griffith, who served on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington — to function an impartial third social gathering to evaluation the information seized by the FBI throughout its Aug. 8 search at Mar-a-Lago. 

Trump’s authorized staff didn’t element why the previous president is opposed to the Justice Department’s particular grasp recommendations, telling the court docket “it is more respectful to the candidates from either party to withhold the bases for opposition from a public, and likely to be widely circulated, pleading.” They requested the court docket for permission to categorical their objections to Jones and Griffith provided that the decide “specifies a desire to obtain and consider that information.”

The Justice Department stated in its personal filing Monday night that the court docket ought to choose as particular grasp both of its candidates, Jones or Griffith, or Raymond Dearie, who Trump put forth as a candidate. Now a senior decide of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, he is a former chief decide of that court docket and has served as a decide on the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

“Judges Jones, Griffith, and Dearie each have substantial judicial experience, during which they have presided over federal criminal and civil cases, including federal cases involving national security and privilege concerns,” federal prosecutors stated, noting that the three can be found to carry out the duties. 

The Justice Department stated it “respectfully opposes” the second potential particular grasp proposed by Trump’s lawyers: Paul Huck, former basic counsel to then Florida Gov. Charlie Crist. The Justice Department famous that Huck “does not appear to have similar experience.”

The filings from Trump’s lawyers and the Justice Department are the newest stemming from his request final month for a impartial third social gathering to evaluation the supplies taken by federal investigators. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon licensed the appointment of the particular grasp final week, and federal prosecutors notified the federal court docket in South Florida final week of their intent to attraction Cannon’s determination. 

Justice Department lawyers, together with its high nationwide safety officers, additionally requested Cannon to put a part of her ruling on maintain to enable investigators to proceed reviewing a tranche of 103 information marked “confidential,” “top secret” or “secret.” 

Federal prosecutors argued in court docket papers the classification markings “establish on the face of the documents that they are government records,” not Trump’s private information. They warned that the federal government and broader public will endure what they view as “irreparable harm” if the supplies can’t be reviewed and used within the legal investigation into the previous president’s dealing with of delicate information. 

The Justice Department additionally advised the court docket final week that quickly blocking investigators from reviewing and utilizing of essentially the most delicate information taken from Mar-a-Lago would “frustrate the government’s ability to conduct an effective national security risk assessment and classification review and could preclude the government from taking necessary remedial steps in light of that review,” risking hurt to U.S. nationwide safety and intelligence pursuits. 

But in opposing the movement from federal prosecutors, lawyers for the previous president argued Monday that he had “broad authority” to declassify documents and, as a former president, has an “unfettered right” to access presidential information beneath the Presidential Records Act. The controversy surrounding the information, they advised the court docket, is a “document storage dispute that has spiraled out of control.”

“[T]he government wrongfully seeks to criminalize the possession by the 45th president of his own presidential and personal records,” Trump’s attorneys claimed.

In her ruling final week granting Trump’s request for a particular grasp, Cannon ordered the Justice Department to quickly cease “reviewing and using” the supplies for investigative functions pending completion of the evaluation by the particular grasp. She did, nonetheless, enable the federal government to proceed reviewing and utilizing the information seized for “purposes of intelligence classification and national security assessments.”

Cannon had ordered Trump and the Justice Department to submit by Friday an inventory of contenders to function particular grasp, together with a proposed description of the mechanics of their evaluation.