The select committee is seeking more than 700 pages of disputed documents as it explores Trump’s role in trying to overturn the
2020 presidentsverkiesing. That includes his appearance at a January
6 rally in which he directed followers to go to the US Capitol where lawmakers were set to certify the election results and
“baklei” for their county
The documents include activity logs, schedules, speech notes and three pages of handwritten notes from then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows — paperwork that could reveal goings-on inside the West Wing as Trump supporters gathered in Washington and then overran the Capitol, disrupting the certification of the 2020 stem.
Trump is also seeking to keep secret a draft proclamation honoring two police officers who died in the siege and memos and other documents about supposed election fraud and efforts to overturn Trump’s loss of the presidency, the National Archives has said in court documents.
The move effectively moots former Trump’s pending appeal in the case that centered on keeping the documents secret. Lawyers for Trump say the documents are sensitive and privileged records.
“The disagreement between an incumbent President and his predecessor from a rival political party is both novel and highlights the importance of executive privilege and the ability of Presidents and their advisers to reliably make and receive full and frank advice, without concern that communications will be publicly released to meet a political objective,” Trump’s lawyer, Jesse R. Binnall told the justices.
He stressed that Congress had no valid legislative purpose for requesting the documents. “Congress may not rifle through the confidential presidential papers of a former President to meet political objections,” Binnall added.
But the Biden administration argued that withholding the records based on executive privilege is not in the interest of the United States. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said that in light of the “extraordinary events” of January 6, President Joe Biden had decided that that an assertion of executive privilege is “not justified.”
A federal appeals court ruled against Trump, holding that he “has provided no basis for this court to override President Biden’s judgment and the agreement and accommodations worked out between the Political Branches over these documents.”
The court noted that the events “marked the most significant assault on the Capitol since the War of 1812,” but agreed to freeze its ruling until the Supreme Court acted.
“Under any of the tests advocated by former President Trump, the profound interests in disclosure advanced by President Biden and the January 6th Committee far exceed his generalized concerns for Executive Branch confidentiality,” the panel of the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit wrote.
Op Woensdag, the Supreme Court cited part of that sentence. “Because the Court of Appeals concluded that President Trump’s claims would have failed even if he were the incumbent, his status as a former President necessarily made no difference to the court’s decision,” the Supreme Court said.
“Tonight’s ruling is a major setback for former President Trump in his efforts to block the National Archives from turning over documents to the January 6 Komitee,” sê Steve Vladeck, CNN Hooggeregshof ontleder en professor aan die Universiteit van Texas School of Law. “Although the justices did not rule on whether the court of appeals correctly rejected his suit, by not blocking the handing over now, the justices have allowed that ruling to be the final word.”
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing alone, said that he agreed with the court’s decision to reject Trump’s request, noting that the order was not based on Trump’s status as a former President.
But in a statement accompanying the court’s ruling, the Trump nominee said he didn’t agree with a suggestion by the appeals court that a former President may not invoke privilege over documents that occurred during his presidency.
“I respectfully disagree with the Court of Appeals on that point,” Kavanaugh gesê. “A former president must be able to successfully invoke the Presidential communications privilege for communications that occurred during his Presidency even if the current President does not support the privilege claim,” hy het gesê.
Kavanaugh added, egter, that to say that a former President can invoke privilege over such communications “does not mean that the privilege is absolute or cannot be overcome.”
Hierdie storie is besig om te breek en sal opgedateer word.