NewsPolitics

Actions

Supreme Court won't intervene in Mar-a-Lago search dispute

Trump Legal Troubles
Posted
and last updated

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme will not step into the legal fight over the classified documents seized during an FBI search of his Florida estate.

An application that was submitted to Justice Clarence Thomas, who oversees emergency matters from Florida and several other Southern states, was denied on Thursday.

The Trump team asked the justices to overturn a lower court ruling and allow the arbiter, called a special master, to review the roughly 100 documents with classification markings that were taken in the Aug. 8 search of Mar-a-Lago.

A three-judge panel from the Atlanta-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit last month limited the special master's review to the much larger tranche of non-classified documents. The judges, including two Trump appointees, sided with the Justice Department, which had argued there was no legal basis for the special master to conduct his own review of the classified records.

But Trump's lawyers said in their application to the Supreme Court that it was essential for the special master to have access to the classified records to “determine whether documents bearing classification markings are in fact classified, and regardless of classification, whether those records are personal records or Presidential records.”

The FBI says it seized roughly 11,000 documents, including about 100 with classification markings, during its search. The Trump team asked a judge in Florida, Aileen Cannon, to appoint a special master to do an independent review of the records.

Cannon subsequently assigned a veteran Brooklyn judge, Raymond Dearie, to review the records and segregate those that may be protected by claims of attorney-client privilege and executive privilege. She also barred the FBI from being able to use the classified documents as part of its criminal investigation.

The Justice Department appealed, prompting the 11th Circuit to lift Cannon's hold on investigators' ability to scrutinize the classified records. The appeals court also ruled that the department did not have to provide Dearie with access to the classified records.