Justice Department, Trump lawyers propose names for arbiter in Mar-a-Lago search
The Justice Department and Donald Trump’s legal team proposed candidates Friday for the role of an independent arbiter in the investigation into top-secret documents found at the former president’s Florida home, but the two sides differed on the scope of duties the person would have.
Lawyers for Trump said they believe the so-called special master should review all documents seized by the FBI during its search last month of Mar-a-Lago, including records with classification markings, and filter out any that may be protected by claims of executive privilege.
The Justice Department said it does not believe the arbiter should be permitted to inspect classified records or to consider potential claims of executive privilege.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon had given both sides until Friday to submit potential candidates for the role of a special master, as well as proposals for the scope of the person’s duties and the schedule for his or her work.
News of hundreds of missing classified documents recovered from former President Trump’s home has the intelligence community reeling and the public asking: “How could it happen?”
The Justice Department submitted the names of two retired judges — Barbara Jones, who served on the federal bench in Manhattan and has performed the same role in previous high-profile investigations, and Thomas Griffith, a former federal appeals court jurist in the District of Columbia.
Trump‘s team proposed one retired judge, Raymond Dearie — who is also the former top federal prosecutor in the Eastern District of New York — and prominent Florida lawyer Paul Huck Jr.
The back-and-forth over the special master is playing out amid an FBI investigation into Trump’s retention of several hundred classified documents recovered from Mar-a-Lago within the past year. Though the legal wrangling is unlikely to have major long-term effects on the criminal investigation into Trump or to knock it significantly off course, it will almost certainly delay the inquiry, and has already caused the intelligence community to temporarily pause a national risk assessment.
Over the strenuous objections of the Justice Department, Cannon on Monday granted the Trump team’s request for the special master and directed the department to temporarily halt its review of the records for investigative purposes.
She said the person would be responsible for sifting through the records recovered during the Aug. 8 search of Mar-a-Lago and filtering out any documents potentially covered by claims of attorney-client or executive privilege.
Roughly 11,000 documents — including over 100 with classified markings, some at the top-secret level — were recovered during the search. That’s in addition to the classified documents contained in 15 boxes retrieved in January by the National Archives and Records Administration, and to sensitive government records the department took back during a June visit to Mar-a-Lago.
The list unsealed Friday provides a detailed accounting of what the FBI found at Mar-a-Lago.
The Justice Department had objected to the Trump team’s request for a special master, saying it had already completed its own review in which it identified a limited subset of records that possibly involve attorney-client privilege. Agency officials have maintained that executive privilege does not apply in this investigation because Trump is no longer president and had no right to claim the documents as his own.
The department filed a notice of appeal Thursday indicating it would appeal the judge’s order to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. Officials asked the judge, a Trump appointee, to lift her hold on their investigative work pending their appeal, as well as her requirement that the department share recovered classified records with a special master.
It is not clear whether Trump or anyone else will be charged.
Get our Essential Politics newsletter
The latest news, analysis and insights from our politics team.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.