DOJ asks 11th Circuit for partial stay, allowing attorneys to use classified docs during special master review
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The Department of Justice has asked the 11th Circuit to allow it to continue using classified documents seized from former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property in a criminal investigation.
The DOJ’s request comes after a special master was appointed to review documents seized from Trump’s Florida property.
This image contained in a court filing by the Department of Justice on Aug. 30, 2022, and redacted by in part by the FBI, shows a photo of documents seized during the Aug. 8 search by the FBI of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. On Thursday, a federal judge appointed a special master to review the documents. (Department of Justice via AP)
“Although the government believes the district court fundamentally erred in appointing a special master and granting injunctive relief, the government seeks to stay only the portions of the order causing the most serious and immediate harm to the government and the public by (1) restricting the government’s review and use of records bearing classification markings and (2) requiring the government to disclose those records for a special-master review process,” the DOJ wrote.
Friday’s motion is a partial appeal that would allow prosecutors to continue working with documents while Raymond Dearie, the special master appointed by Judge Aileen Cannon, reviews them.
US Attorney General Merrick Garland delivers a statement at the Department of Justice on April 26, 2021 in Washington, DC. Garland announced that the Justice Department will begin an investigation into the policing practices of the Louisville Police Department in Kentucky. A report of any constitutional and unlawful violations will be published. (Photo by Mandel Ngan-Pool/Getty Image)
Prosecutors argued in the motion that Trump would not be able to assert executive privilege over the documents, which are the property of the executive branch. They also urged the court to rule on their motion quickly because the “public would suffer irreparable harm absent a stay.”