- Trump filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court on Tuesday in the dispute over the documents seized.
- The former president wants a special master in the case to review classified documents.
- The Supreme Court gave the Justice Department until Tuesday to respond.
WASHINGTON – Former President Donald Trump filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court in the ongoing litigation over documents seized from his Mar-a-Lago club in early August. The request is narrow, but it has once again embroiled the nation’s highest court in a political controversy involving the former president who appointed three of its members. Here’s a rundown of what we know about the repository and what comes next:
What did Trump file in the Supreme Court?
Trump has filed what is called an emergency request challenging part of a Sept. 21 decision from the Atlanta-based company United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. The move allowed the Justice Department to continue reviewing classified documents seized from Trump’s estate in Florida and blocked a lower court’s ruling requiring the government to submit the documents to an independent arbiter, or special master, for exam. Trump’s call challenges the second part of this decision and if he wins, then the special master, U.S. District Judge Raymond Deariewould review the documents.
Deposit:Trump asks Supreme Court to rule on review of classified documents seized at Mar-a-Lago
Calls:Court Grants DOJ Investigative Access to Seized Classified Documents
Why did Trump file a Supreme Court appeal?
The 47-page document is quite technical and raises questions about whether the 11th Circuit had jurisdiction to rule as it did. Trump’s ostensible argument is to have a an independent entity reviews the documents, not just the Department of Justice. The appeal is peppered with references to the “unprecedented circumstances” of the seizure, “an investigation of the forty-fifth president of the United States by the administration of his political rival and successor.” Any limits on a transparent review of documents, Trump’s Supreme Court attorneys said, “erodes public confidence in our justice system.”
What is Trump’s record on the Supreme Court?
Trump’s record on the nation’s highest court is not great. In January, for example, the The Supreme Court refused to block the House committee’s investigation the January 6 attack on the Capitol for obtaining Trump’s administrative documents. In 2020, the the court ruled that Trump could not keep his tax returns and the financial records of a New York City prosecutor who was pursuing possible silent payments during the 2016 White House race. This prosecutor did not seek re-election and two of his deputies who were leading a criminal investigation left the Manhattan District Attorney’s office in February.
Loss:Supreme Court refuses to block January 6 panel from receiving Trump documents
Taxes:Supreme Court says President Trump can’t keep prosecutors’ tax and financial records
How soon could the Supreme Court act in the case of Trump?
The emergency application file – known colloquially as the “phantom folder” – can move quite quickly. It is often used, for example, to handle last-minute calls from people on death row who could be executed within hours. However, the court appeared to stall the case hours after Trump filed. Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, which handles those emergency calls from the 11th Circuit, gave the federal government until Tuesday to respond. It’s fast by Supreme Court standards, but it’s not as fast as these cases can sometimes move forward.
Electoral redistricting:Alabama redistricting case reignites fight between judges
Abortion:Texas abortion ruling renews criticism of Supreme Court’s ‘shadow brief’
Who is the special master in the case of Trump?
On September 15, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon named semi-retired federal judge in Brooklyn, Dearie, to examine the thousands of documents seized from Trump’s estate in Florida. Honey, 78 years old, was accepted by Trump and the Department of Justice. Dearie reviews some of the documents that FBI agents seized Aug. 8 at Mar-a-Lago for personal records and documents that are potentially protected by solicitor-client privilege or professional secrecy.
Separately, the 11th Circuit on Wednesday approved an expedited appeal for the appointment of the special master to review documents seized at Mar-a-Lago.
The Justice Department appealed part of Cannon’s order appointing Dearie to review 11,000 documents. The department wanted to continue its criminal review of approximately 100 classified documents and not provide those records to Dearie.
A panel of three 11th Circuit judges temporarily agreed and allowed the department to resume its criminal review while the case is argued.
The ministry urged a speedy review of the case because of the strong public interest and because the issues in the case are largely about law rather than facts. The department said delaying the review would prevent its access to the rest of the 11,000 unclassified documents.
But Trump’s attorneys said the case didn’t need to be expedited, primarily because his team needed more time to organize their case while overseeing the special master’s review. Trump’s lawyers have suggested a closing argument could take place in January or later.
Instead, the appeals court set deadlines in October and November for the submission of briefs. No pleadings were scheduled.
What are experts saying about Trump’s appeal to the Supreme Court?
Steve Vladeckprofessor of law at the University of Texas, noted on twitter that “Trump’s record before the Supreme Court in cases involving him personally (as opposed to his official actions as President) has been abysmal”. Of Thomas’ one-week deadline for the government to respond, Vladeck wrote that “this delay doesn’t help Trump. At all. It’s a big enough sign from Thomas that even *he* doesn’t is in no rush, which doesn’t bode well for Trump’s chances of getting the whole court to rally behind him.”
Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, agreed. “That means he doesn’t see this as ‘the emergency’ that Trump claims it is,” Mariotti posted on Twitter. “This narrow motion for Supreme Court review is sure looks like an effort by Trump’s lawyers find an excuse to plead something to appease their client, even if “winning” would achieve nothing of substance.”
Contributor: Kevin Johnson, Kevin McCoy
