General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums
Robert Costa's thread on the DoJ filing that just dropped.
Link to tweet
?s=20&t=muJHxc3_Z1F5pl3ZXug_fQ
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Brother Buzz
(39,900 posts)That's the talking point.
I would like to read the response in a reader friendly form.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)If you click on the fuzzy image in the middle of the tweet, you can read a very clear and sharp image of the .pdf from the court file. My stuff will be in italics.
Introduction concludes: "Not only does Plaintiff lack standing to raise these claims at this juncture,
but even if his claims were properly raised, Plaintiff would not be entitled to the relief he seeks."
Summary of Argument
Plaintiff’s motion to appoint a special master, enjoin further review of seized materials,
and require the return of seized items fails for multiple, independent reasons. As an initial
matter, the former President lacks standing to seek judicial relief or oversight as to Presidential
records because those records do not belong to him. The Presidential Records Act makes clear
that “[t]he United States” has “complete ownership, possession, and control” of them. 44
U.S.C. § 2202. Furthermore, this Court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate Plaintiff’s Fourth
Amendment challenges to the validity of the search warrant and his arguments for returning
or suppressing the materials seized. For those reasons and others, Plaintiff has shown no basis
for the Court to grant injunctive relief. Plaintiff is not likely to succeed on the merits; he will
suffer no injury absent an injunction—let alone an irreparable injury; and the harms to the
government and the public would far outweigh any benefit to Plaintiff.
Even if the Court had jurisdiction to entertain Plaintiff’s claims, appointment of a
special master is unnecessary and would significantly harm important governmental interests,
including national security interests. Appointment of a special master is disfavored in a case
such as this. In any event, the government’s filter team has already completed its work of
segregating any seized materials that are potentially subject to attorney-client privilege, and
the government’s investigative team has already reviewed all of the remaining materials,
including any that are potentially subject to claims of executive privilege. Appointment of a
special master to review materials potentially subject to claims of executive privilege would
be particularly inappropriate because binding Supreme Court precedent forecloses Plaintiff’s
argument that review of these materials by personnel within the Executive Branch raises any
such privilege concerns. Furthermore, appointment of a special master would impede the
government’s ongoing criminal investigation and—if the special master were tasked with
reviewing classified documents—would impede the Intelligence Community from
conducting its ongoing review of the national security risk that improper storage of these
highly sensitive materials may have caused and from identifying measures to rectify or
mitigate any damage that improper storage caused. Lastly, this case does not involve any of
the types of circumstances that have warranted appointment of a special master to review
materials potentially subject to attorney-client privilege.
There follows a lengthy section recapping the proceedings that led to the issuance of the search warrant. Then comes the Argument section. Here are the section headings:
I. Plaintiff Lacks Standing to Seek Judicial Oversight and Related Relief in
Relation to Any Presidential Records Seized from the Premises
II. Plaintiff Is Not Entitled to the Return of Property or to Injunctive Relief
A. Plaintiff Is Not Entitled to the Return of Any Property
B. Plaintiff Is Not Entitled to Injunctive Relief
III. Even if the Former President Had Standing, the Appointment of a Special
Master Would Be Unnecessary and Would Interfere with Legitimate
Government Interests
A. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 53 Counsels Against Appointment of a
Special Master in Circumstances Such as These
B. Appointment of a Special Master Is Neither Necessary nor Appropriate to Address
Executive Privilege in this Case
1. A former President cannot successfully assert executive privilege against the
Executive Branch in its performance of executive functions.
2. Even if a former President could in some circumstances assert executive
privilege against the Executive Branch, no such assertion would be valid here.
3. Appointment of a special master to review materials for claims of executive
privilege would be inconsistent with principles of equity.
C. This Case Does Not Involve the Search of an Attorney’s Office and the AttorneyClient Privilege Issues Presented Are Not Complex, Voluminous, or Novel
D. The Court Should Not Appoint a Special Master, But if It Does, the Below
Conditions Should Apply
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the Court should deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Judicial
Oversight (D.E. 1) and decline to require the return of seized items, enjoin further review of
seized materials, or appoint a special master.
bahboo
(16,953 posts)
crickets
(26,168 posts)Executive Branch in its performance of executive functions.
Stop pretending you're still president, loser.
The entire page screams, "Idiot. You screwed up. These things did not belong to you then, they don't belong to you now, and they will never belong to you. You are in so much trouble, you have no idea. Stop trying to waste everyone's time. It's not going to work. You are doomed."
So here for it. Thank you, gratuitous!
Hugin
(37,848 posts)
“ Furthermore, appointment of a special master would impede the government’s ongoing criminal investigation… “
Got that? Criminal investigation.
Hekate
(100,133 posts)… to take home, but belongs to the whole classroom:
As an initial
matter, the former President lacks standing to seek judicial relief or oversight as to Presidential
records because those records do not belong to him. The Presidential Records Act makes clear
that “[t]he United States” has “complete ownership, possession, and control” of them.
Hekate
(100,133 posts)
Jim__
(15,222 posts)It will be interesting to see how the trump appointed judge responds.
Tanuki
(16,448 posts)
ismnotwasm
(42,674 posts)So very sweet
uponit7771
(93,532 posts)
W_HAMILTON
(10,333 posts)...than Trump does. 
SoCalDavidS
(10,599 posts)TFG hasn't even been cited for so much as jaywalking.
W_HAMILTON
(10,333 posts)That's on those too afraid to prosecute Trump for his obvious crimes, even though it looks like the circle is finally closing in for a change...
Bayard
(29,693 posts)
TeamProg
(6,630 posts)
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)SoCalDavidS
(10,599 posts)
orleans
(36,919 posts)Even if the Court had jurisdiction to entertain Plaintiff’s claims, appointment of a
special master is unnecessary and would significantly harm important governmental interests,
including national security interests. Appointment of a special master is disfavored in a case
from page 3
Samrob
(4,298 posts)
2naSalit
(102,799 posts)It loudly illustrates how unqualified to be a judge this rumpite really is.