DOJ urges Supreme Court to stay out of Mar-a-Lago documents fight

The Justice Department urged the Supreme Court to reject former President Donald Trump’s request that it intervene in the dispute over classified documents seized from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in August.
Calling the records “extraordinarily sensitive,” the Justice Department said the Supreme Court should let stand a federal appeals court order that blocked the special master’s access over those records while legal challenges play out.
#CNN #News


  1. This isn’t just a fight, it’s a fight for justice and equal justice which matters for all. 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇺🇸

    1. @Agree to Disagree it doesn’t matter what the documents are. If you take something that does not belong to you that is called stealing no matter how you slice it.

    1. @Joel Rodriguez you do realise that scotus has already ruled against Trump 3 times in the past. If a vote by the entire court is heard, I think you’ll be in for a shock

  2. If the notion that everyone is equal before the law holds true in America, then ask yourself whether anyone else would’ve been able to draw out this process and involve so many different institutions just to avoid accountability.

    1. Yet I choose to believe the majority of Americans want constitution, rule of law, democracy [public control of government] to matter regardless of Trump-GOP efforts to undermine confidence in institutions of democracy like judicial system. Solution in a democracy is education, registration, VOTE on November 8, 2022.

    2. @Cheryl Dee negative, they only need incriminating evidence if there is any and then charge him. Problem is, they aren’t charging him because they are still in search of a crime.

    3. @Mr Breeze Right. Because YOU would know. Where did you get that brilliant deduction from? Trump himself? Because, you know….he’s such a stable genius. Just ask him. 🤡

  3. What’s the point of having a Chief Justice if he doesn’t do his job of recusing Judge Thomas from this case?

    1. Why should Thomas recuse himself? Why doesn’t Merrick Garland recuse HIMSELF from ANYTHING to do with the Supreme Court? He is ‘t on it and never will be

    2. Out of what orifice did you pull the idea that the chief justice has to authority to force another justice to recuse himself? Because it intuitively seems to you that it ought to be that way based on his title, so you just assume it? The chief justice is doing his job, and doing it very well. It’s Clarence Thomas who’s doing a shitty job, as he always has. A justice’s recusal depends on his own integrity, _therefore_ Clarence Thomas will not recuse.

  4. ‘Millions and millions…’ ‘Many people don’t know this but…’
    Once he starts saying that you know he’s lying

    1. @Patricia Rouse more than listen to TNN or msnbc’s lies about him. Stop proving him right all the time.

  5. Anybody else who gets caught red handed with evidence gets charged and must stand before the judge and explain themselves. The man has confessed to the crime. Time to lower the boom!

    1. Taint Fingers Gooboy must go down. Also his drag persona, Trombone FeeFee Glamorous. Donald John (Barron) Trump loves the alias

    2. @Jonathan Michael Johnson Seen “Supreme-Court vs Democracy” by ‘Some More News’?

      Whats your Take here?

  6. Not only can the Trump team have access but doesn’t this give the judge the opportunity to override the master’s decision on what is privilege and what is not privilege. She could ultimately deem something privilege and take it out of the DOJs investigation. Am I wrong on this?

  7. This is just so outrageously disgusting! We have lost our minds as Americans, where a blatant lie is gently protected. Bullies shouldn’t win. The lawyer she be arrested for her crimes.

    1. @Shawn Stephens funny, you are the one using playground insults. Can’t you all just chill out, I swear to god you cant even mention anything politically anymore without it devolving into crybabies in the comments on either side. Look at yourselves, you are all acting like children.

    2. @greg what is facist about stating someone should be arrested for crimes they commit? I think you need to look up what the “term” facist describes. Stating someone should be arrested for crimes committed is simply following the rule of law which unfortunately has been undermined by the MAGA GOP

    3. @greg not if t he lawyer participates in criminal activities, or are you stating that just because someone is your lawyer, if you tell them to assault someone and they do so, that lawyer cannot be arrested without those arresting the lawyer being facists? How idiotic. More and more, the movie, “Idiocracy,” appears to be moving toward reality.

  8. The DOJ could just take a owner’s manual from a refrigerator and slap it into one of those empty classified folders and he wouldn’t know the differance…just throw him a package of multicolor sharpies that should shut him up

    1. No, he wouldn’t, because I don’t think he can read( seriously). But his lawyers can, so although I think that is a good idea , I doubt it will work. But it gave me a chuckle, so thanks.

    2. @Carol Hill I was just making a joke of it…this is a guy who thought it was a good idea to use a nuke to stop a hurricane

  9. Lmao. He wants their attorneys to see SCI materials? I’d say… No. They are not allowed. There’s existing law for this

  10. The precedent these proceedings set could possibly be used by others as a defense if for some reason Trump is allowed to gain from them.

  11. Aileen Cannon’s conduct displays lack of Self- Respect and Self- Confidence. She knows that she lacks the qualifications for the job that was given to her as a favor. So, despite being rejected by the Court of appeals regarding the important Classified documents , she still continues her pathetic conduct. She will be remembered as a shameful footnote in American Legal History.

  12. I don’t know if Drump’s slow speaking when he lies is for emphasis, or because he needs an extra moment to make up the story.

  13. if Trump’s lawyers were to be allowed to see the Top Secret documents would they not need to be accredited? As it seems that Trump can only hire lawyers from the dregs of the legal profession these days the DOJ/FBI are hardly likely to agree to that and hopefully the Supreme Court would not agree either.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.