Federal judge denies Trump's attempt to withhold records from January 6 committee
A federal judge will allow the US House to access hundreds
of pages of documents from Donald Trump's presidency leading up to and about
the January 6 attack at the US Capitol, in a forceful rejection of Trump's
recent attempts to control information from his White House.
The ruling Tuesday night from Judge Tanya Chutkan of the US
District Court in DC is a blow to Trump's efforts to keep more than 700 pages
of records from his White House secret -- though his legal team has informed
the court it intends to appeal.
"Presidents are not kings, and Plaintiff is not
President," she wrote.
As of now, the National Archives remains on track to turn
over to the House a number of documents on Friday, including White House call
logs, video logs and schedules related to January 6 as well as three pages of
handwritten notes from Trump's then-chief of staff. The outcome in court also
could help the House in its pursuit of more information from those around
Trump, including witnesses who've been subpoenaed and haven't spoken to the
committee yet.
"The court holds that the public interest lies in
permitting -- not enjoining -- the combined will of the legislative and
executive branches to study the events that led to and occurred on January 6,
and to consider legislation to prevent such events from ever occurring
again," Chutkan wrote in a 39-page opinion.
The judge, in her ruling, shut down Trump's arguments in
court on several fronts.
She decided that a former president's wishes couldn't
overcome the decisions of the current president regarding protecting privileged
information of the executive branch. "It is the incumbent President who is
best situated to protect executive branch interests," Chutkan said.
She also knocked down Trump for any attempts to protect
himself out of secrecy. Presidential privilege "exists for the benefit of
the Republic, not any individual," she wrote. Because of that, Congress
and the courts can access presidential communications when there's a need to
inform the public, the judge decided.
In this case, the judge said she wouldn't look at Trump's
records document by document and wouldn't second-guess the Biden
administration's decision to release them. She also noted that though the
committee has made sweeping requests for requests, it does "not exceed"
its legislative power.
The former Republican President filed his lawsuit last month
in DC District Court, claiming executive privilege and alleging that the
House's requests for documents are "unprecedented in their breadth and
scope" and illegitimate.
The Biden White House has declined to intervene to block
access to the Trump records. The National Archives, which inherited Trump's
presidential records after he left office, has said it will begin handing over
records to the House committee next week, on November 12, with more document
productions set for later in November.
The case has already become an historic test of the power of
a former president.
Some of the records Trump has sought to keep secret include
White House visitor records, call logs, and notes from his top advisers related
to his claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen and his reaction
to the January 6 attack, according to a sworn declaration from the National
Archives.
The House has argued to the court that Trump has no right to
keep the documents confidential from his presidency and say the need for the
records is to reconstruct Trump's actions on January 6 and his efforts to
undermine the 2020 election.
Rep. Bennie Thompson, who chairs the House select committee,
called the ruling a "big deal" for the congressional probe, telling
CNN's Chris Cuomo on "Cuomo Prime Time" that he looks forward to the
panel's investigators "going through (the documents) with a fine-tooth
comb to make sure that our government was not weaponized against its
citizens."
"We can only do that by getting access to the
information. I applaud our lawyers who defended us in this court setting,"
the Mississippi Democrat said. "I applaud the expeditious ruling that we
got because we have to get to this."
No comments