Former President Donald Trump's legal team responded to the Justice Department's blistering rebuke of its request for a court-appointed third party to review documents recovered from Mar-a-Lago earlier this month with an inflammatory accusation that the government is sidestepping Trump's rights and its investigators are not to be trusted.
"Left unchecked, the DOJ will impugn, leak, and publicize selective aspects of their investigation," Trump's legal team wrote in its filing on Wednesday, suggesting that without a special master, it would have to "somehow trust the self-restraint of currently unchecked investigators."
The 19-page filing came in response to a what Trump's team called an "extraordinary document" filed by DOJ late Tuesday that, in addition to arguing against the Trump team's request, revealed the most detailed account yet of the interactions between the two parties and suggested that documents had likely been "concealed and removed' by members of Trump's team, whom the DOJ suggested were so uncooperative that it led them to suspect that efforts had been made to "obstruct the government's investigation." Trump's team wrote that DOJ's filing "twists the framework of responding to a motion for a Special Master."
Trump's legal team initially argued in its first filing since the FBI conducted a search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago home earlier this month that the federal government violated the former president's Fourth Amendment rights and a special master should be appointed to review the documents seized and identify any covered by executive privilege. Trump's lawyers also requested that the government provide a more detailed receipt for property, return any item seized outside of the scope of the warrant and enjoin further review of seized material until the appointment of a special master.
His legal team on Wednesday reiterated the argument that the former president's constitutional rights had been violated, writing that the DOJ's rebuke of their argument undermines the "effect of the Fourth Amendment" and would "justify improper searches," while sidestepping DOJ's claims of obstruction of justice that were most clearly displayed in Tuesday night's filing.
"In general, the Government's argument is premature," Trump's team wrote, saying that the issue is not relevant to the request for a special master but adding somewhat ominously that in "due time" it "will establish standing to contest the unconstitutional search."
The request for a special master hinged on Trump's claim that some of the documents taken from Mar-a-Lago were protected by executive privilege. The Justice Department, in its response, rejected that claim, saying that "the former President never asserted executive privilege over any of the documents nor claimed that any of the documents in the boxes containing classification markings had been declassified."
Still, in a post on his social media platform on Wednesday, Trump again asserted that he had declassified documents. Trump's legal team made no mention of declassifying documents.
Meanwhile, some have questioned the effectiveness of Trump's request altogether, which came weeks after the search was conducted, especially as the Justice Department reported in court filings on Monday that it had completed an initial analysis of privileged documents taken from Mar-a-Lago.
But Trump's legal team noted in its filing on Wednesday that the Justice Department "appears to argue simultaneously that a Special Master is unnecessary because the review is complete and that a Special Master is inappropriate because such an appointment would interfere with the review process."
In its filing, the Justice Department refuted the request for a special master more generally, saying that "notwithstanding the wide-ranging meritless accusations leveled against the government in the motion" that Trump's team lacked standing to raise claims weeks after the search had been conducted. But even if the claims were "properly raised," the filing said, Trump "would not be entitled to the relief he seeks."
DOJ went on to argue that "even if the court had jurisdiction to entertain" the claims from Trump's team, "appointment of a special master is unnecessary and would significantly harm important government interests, including national security interests," although it proposed a number of conditions under which the special master should operate if one is appointed. Trump's team, for the most part, agreed with those conditions.
The filing comes as U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon is set to consider the arguments in a hearing Thursday, after she expressed a "preliminary intent" to grant Trump's request for a special master. But the Trump-appointed judge said the order should not be understood as her final decision on the matter.
Copyright 2022 U.S. News & World Report