Former Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago materials is to be reviewed by special master after a federal judge granted his request on Monday to review the materials that the FBI retrieved during a search last month.
According to the report by Deadline, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon authorized Trump’s request for the appointment of a special master “to review the seized property for personal items and documents and potentially privileged material subject to claims of attorney-client privilege and/or executive privilege.” It means that the Justice Department has to pause its use of the materials as it conducts its investigation of why Trump held the Mar-a-Lago materials
Trump had filed a lawsuit to appoint a special master to review the Mar-a-Lago materials, while the Justice Department argued that such an official was not necessary.
Trump has claimed that he had declassified the trove of material found with top secret and other markets at his estate, but there is no record of him actually doing so. He also has claimed that some of the documents are protected by attorney-client or executive privilege, but the latter designation has been in doubt because he is no longer in office.
The judge wrote in her order that she was “mindful of the need to ensure at least the appearance of fairness and integrity under the extraordinary circumstances presented.”
It was not immediately clear if the Justice Department will appeal the ruling.
The decision, from Trump’s request for appointed District Judge Aileen Cannon, is a significant victory for the former President, who has railed against the Biden administration and Justice Department since the search was executed four weeks ago, CNN reports.
“As a function of Plaintiff’s former position as President of the United States, the stigma associated with the subject seizure is in a league of its own,” Cannon wrote. “A future indictment, based to any degree on property that ought to be returned, would result in reputational harm of a decidedly different order of magnitude.”
Cannon ordered that a third-party attorney, from outside the government, be brought in to review the materials that were taken from Trump’s home and resort in Florida. The order also halts the Justice Department from continuing its review of the materials seized from Mar-a-Lago “pending completion of the special master’s review or further Court order.”
The classification review and intelligence assessments being conducted by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, however, will be allowed to continue.
Both sides have until Friday to nominate special master candidates and their specific duties.
Trump’s lawyers argued that a special master was needed because they don’t trust the Justice Department to fairly identify privileged materials that would need to be excluded from the ongoing criminal probe.
Trump blasted the Justice Department and the seizure at his rally in Pennsylvania this weekend.
“This egregious abuse of the law is going to produce a backlash the likes of which nobody has ever seen before,” he said. “… these same exact people at Justice and the FBI, these same exact people, along with outside scum, are at it again with the horrific raid of my home. They just go on and on and they have to be stopped.”
However, Cannon wrote that Trump had not proven that his constitutional rights were disregarded.
“(T)he Court agrees with the Government that, at least based on the record to date, there has not been a compelling showing of callous disregard for Plaintiff’s constitutional rights,” she wrote.
But Cannon cited several reasons for bringing in the special master, among them “the interest in ensuring the integrity of an orderly process amidst swirling allegations of bias and media leaks.” She also cited the historic nature of the case.
The judge said the special master will be tasked with reviewing “seized property for personal items and documents and potentially privileged material subject to claims of attorney-client and/or executive privilege.”
She added: “The Court is mindful that restraints on criminal prosecutions are disfavored but finds that these unprecedented circumstances call for a brief pause to allow for neutral, third-party review to ensure a just process with adequate safeguards.”