- Legal analysts criticized a judge’s decision on the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago investigation.
- A request from the FBI to resume inspection of classified information retrieved there was turned down by the judge.
- They claim that the judge’s assertion that the documents are classified is untrue.
The Federal Judge’s decision to deny an FBI request for a resume inspection of classified information retrieved from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort by the FBI was harshly criticized by legal analysts.
The judge, Aileen Cannon, The ruling stated that she had rejected the Justice Department’s claim. It requests access to about 100 records, which are classified and could contain sensitive information that could threaten US national security.
Trump appointed Cannon, and she was confirmed in 2020 by the Senate. She has also ruled in other cases. Accusations of bias in favor of Trump have been made.
Cannon remained firm in her earlier ruling that an independent official or special master should examine the documents to determine if this was the case.
Some legal experts were shocked by the ruling, as they claimed that Trump had not provided any evidence in court to dispute the classified status. Interviews with him claimed that he has broadly declassified the records. His lawyers have not repeated this argument in court.
—Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw) September 15, 2022
Ryan Goodman, an ex-special counsel to the Defense Department, disproved her claim that there were “ongoing legal and factual disputes” about the document status.
“What factual dispute?” Trump never claimed he had declassified the documents,” he wrote.
In an interview with CNN on Thursday, Harry Litman, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General, described the ruling’s outcome as “bizarre and atrocious”.
He called the ruling “atrocious and aberrant” because the Justice Department stated, “We just want to look at these 100 classified files.” She said that this was what she saw immediately before.
Trump replied, “Classified?” Who claims they are classified? Except the government. How can something be classified? Because the government is classified, and the official authority classified.”
Mark Zaid, national security attorney, echoed these concerns and said that Cannon had been Strangely, the FBI is dismissive of security concerns.
“I’ve never seen a Federal Judge ignore Executive Branch classification concerns as Judge Cannon did tonight,” Cannon tweeted.
Andrew Weissman was one of the leading prosecutors in Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation and was shocked at the outcome.
—Andrew Weissmann 🌻 (@AWeissmann_) September 15, 2022
Judge Cannon is a partisan hack. She claims it is “disputed” the documents are classified. Trump has never claimed in court that he declassified the documents and presented NO evidence. So the only evidence she has is that they are and have been marked. He tweeted, “She really is in the tank here.”
Mar-a-Lago was searched by the FBI on August 8. They found many government records, including highly classified documents, that Trump believed he had taken with him.
In a court filing, the DOJ A picture of folders of documents with clear labelsMar-a-Lago had retrieved “classified” markings from an old Time magazine cover featuring Trump.
According to the FBI, without having access to the documents, it cannot determine the national risks associated with the inadvertent storage of these documents.
Trump’s lawyers argue that some documents are protected under executive confidentiality rules, which protect private presidential communications from scrutiny by Congress and courts.
Cannon appointed a master special to his service. Named Thursday Judge Raymond DeariePartly to screen documents for information falling within this category.
However, privilege rules do not allow for the protection of classified information and records from government agencies. Analysts noted that Trump did not offer any arguments in court challenging the documents’ classified status.
Trump offered other arguments that were not repeated by his lawyers. He claimed the FBI is politically persecuting and claimed without evidence that agents planted evidence during raid.
Cannon’s ruling will likely be appealed by Cannon.
