DOJ Says Outside Review Of Papers Seized From Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Unjustified: Requests Court To Scrap Special Master Appointment

Donald Trump Biography
Donald Trump Biography

The American Justice Department has appealed to void the outside review of materials seized from Donald Trump’s home. The DOJ argued before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals that the selection of a special master to examine material seized from the Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida impedes the process of the criminal inquiry into the mishandling of classified documents by the former president.

Attorneys arguing for Donald Trump have argued that the appointment of the special master was necessary to protect his right to claim executive privilege or attorney-client privilege.

The DOJ filed a brief before the court on Friday, running into 53-page, arguing that the judge overseeing the case, Aileen Cannon, of the district court and appointed by Trump, should not have approved the request for the special master as he never proved the necessity for it.

The appeal by the DOJ is linked to a past ruling from the circuit that reversed part of Cannon’s order on the appointment of a special master and aims to capitalize on it. It argued that Donald Trump failed to demonstrate any need earlier for a similar process.

The Appeal To Remove The Special Master Could Prove Perilous For Donald Trump

The DOJ’s full appeal refers to an earlier 11th Circuit ruling that allowed investigators to carry on examining the 103 documents that have been marked classified. The department argued that this could be done even as a special master reviewed other documents seized to advance the process of the investigation.

The filing by the justice dept. held that since the court had earlier granted the motion to halt that unparalleled order related to documents, it should now inverse the fresh order for the appointment of the special master.

The brief contended that district courts do not have overall justifiable authority to oversee federal investigations into crime. It contended that such challenges to using all the evidence recovered from Donald Trump’s residence should instead be resolved through an ordinary criminal motion at the time of filing of charges.