Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumJudge Grants Special Master Request In Mar-a-Lago - NBC News
A federal judge granted Donald Trumps request for a special master to oversee documents seized by the FBI at Mar-a-Lago. NBC News Ken Dilanian explains what this could mean for the investigation.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
1 replies, 489 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Judge Grants Special Master Request In Mar-a-Lago - NBC News (Original Post)
TexasTowelie
Sep 2022
OP
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,086 posts)1. Here are Neal Katyal's comments on this horrible opinion
Link to tweet
This special master opinion is so bad its hard to know where to begin:
1. She says Biden hasnt weighed in on whether docs protected by Exec Privilege. Nonsense. The archives letter (which DOJ submitted to the Judge) makes it clear current President thinks none of this ...
is privileged. Archivist says it is not a close question
2. Judge enjoins the entire investigation because some of the material might be subject to Executive Privilege. But Executive Priv isnt some post-presidential privilege that allows Presidents to keep documents after ...
they leave office. At most, it simply means these are Executive documents that must be returned to the archives. It doesnt in any way shape or form mean they cant be used in a criminal prosecution about stolen docs...
3. She says the reputational harm to Trump justifies a special master. Thats insaneevery crim deft has reputational harm. Are we now going to have special masters in every crim investigation?
4. She says the Special Master should screen materials for exec privilege, without ever once explaining what specific material is subject to exec priv, particularly when the incumbent President rejects the assertion. How is the Master supposed to figure that intricate Q out?
5. She says that because some tiny percentage of materials might be privileged, the entire investigation over all the materials has to stop. Thats a bazooka when one needs at most a scalpel.
6. She tries to enjoin the Exec Branch from using these materials in an investigation, but the govt has already reviewed all the materials. It makes no sense.
7. She says Trump suffers irreparable harm in interim, but the only harm she isolates is he wont have the docs back during the investig. Thats not irreparable, he can get them back later &if they are improperly used to bring an indictment, he can move to dismiss the indictment
8. Her analysis of standing is terrible. Trump wouldnt own these docs anyway, so why does he get a Master over them? If there is some marginal claim to some attorney client docs, that handful of material can be separately dealt withyou dont enjoin the entire investig for that
9. Her jurisdictional analysis is similarly awful. She let Trump forum shop for a judge, instead of letting the magistrate judge evaluate these claims. The appearances here are tragic.
Thats just a few of many more problems. Frankly, any of my first year law students would have written a better opinion.
1. She says Biden hasnt weighed in on whether docs protected by Exec Privilege. Nonsense. The archives letter (which DOJ submitted to the Judge) makes it clear current President thinks none of this ...
is privileged. Archivist says it is not a close question
2. Judge enjoins the entire investigation because some of the material might be subject to Executive Privilege. But Executive Priv isnt some post-presidential privilege that allows Presidents to keep documents after ...
they leave office. At most, it simply means these are Executive documents that must be returned to the archives. It doesnt in any way shape or form mean they cant be used in a criminal prosecution about stolen docs...
3. She says the reputational harm to Trump justifies a special master. Thats insaneevery crim deft has reputational harm. Are we now going to have special masters in every crim investigation?
4. She says the Special Master should screen materials for exec privilege, without ever once explaining what specific material is subject to exec priv, particularly when the incumbent President rejects the assertion. How is the Master supposed to figure that intricate Q out?
5. She says that because some tiny percentage of materials might be privileged, the entire investigation over all the materials has to stop. Thats a bazooka when one needs at most a scalpel.
6. She tries to enjoin the Exec Branch from using these materials in an investigation, but the govt has already reviewed all the materials. It makes no sense.
7. She says Trump suffers irreparable harm in interim, but the only harm she isolates is he wont have the docs back during the investig. Thats not irreparable, he can get them back later &if they are improperly used to bring an indictment, he can move to dismiss the indictment
8. Her analysis of standing is terrible. Trump wouldnt own these docs anyway, so why does he get a Master over them? If there is some marginal claim to some attorney client docs, that handful of material can be separately dealt withyou dont enjoin the entire investig for that
9. Her jurisdictional analysis is similarly awful. She let Trump forum shop for a judge, instead of letting the magistrate judge evaluate these claims. The appearances here are tragic.
Thats just a few of many more problems. Frankly, any of my first year law students would have written a better opinion.