Judge blocks Trump from destroying records, orders White House staff to comply with Presidential Records Act
&imwidth=600&imheight=450&format=webp&quality=medium "Judge blocks Trump from destroying records, orders White House staff to comply with Presidential Records Act")
Donald Trump cannot destroy records, as per the emergency order. Photograph: (AFP)
Nonprofit watchdog group American Oversight and the American Historical Association had filed a lawsuit to prevent loss or destruction of historical presidential records. A federal court judge ruled that the Presidential Records Act is likely constitutional.
The Trump administration has been ordered to comply with the Presidential Records Act by a federal judge. The emergency ruling means that Trump's top advisers are required to preserve certain presidential records. The DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel claimed in April that the act was unconstitutional, arguing that it unfairly restricted “the constitutional independence and autonomy of the Executive.” Responding to the body, the nonprofit watchdog group American Oversight and the American Historical Association filed a lawsuit in federal court to prevent the potential loss or destruction of historical presidential records. On Wednesday, US District Judge John Bates ruled that the act is likely constitutional, and his order will go into effect on May 26. “The original public meaning of the text of the Constitution, canons of interpretation, Supreme Court precedent, general principles of property law, and almost 50 years of practice confirm that Congress has the enumerated power to regulate presidential records under the [Constitution’s] Property Clause,” the ruling read.
"To adopt the government's position that the Act is unconstitutional would disable Congress and future Presidents from reflecting on experience, in defiance of the very words engraved on the National Archives Building in Washington: 'What is past is prologue,'" Bates wrote.
What is the Presidential Records Act?
The White House is expected to appeal the ruling in a higher court. The 1978 law was enacted in the wake of the Watergate scandal and established that presidential records are public property. Judge Bates also pointed out that Trump had no problems with the law during his first term and complied with it. The order blocks the administration's staff from discarding records, but the President and Vice President themselves are not directly covered by the directive. White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, the National Security Council, Council of Economic Advisers and employees working within the Executive Office of the President are required to comply with it.
The judge further noted that there has not been another Watergate-level scandal, which "suggests that the sunshine disinfectant of the Records Act is working as intended." "Today's ruling is an important victory for presidential accountability and for affirming what decades of law and practice already established — the constitutionality of the Presidential Records Act," Chioma Chukwu, executive director of American Oversight, said in a statement. The Presidential Records Act states that the records belong to the US government, and not the president personally, and hence they must be preserved.
In their lawsuit, the two bodies warned that they had "strong reason" to believe that Trump could try to keep presidential records when his term ends in January 2029. They said that at the end of his first term in early 2021, he tried to hold onto 15 boxes of records. They carried thousands of documents, including those marked classified, and the Archives fought for months to get them back.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
)
)
