FBI must disclose more info about Trump classified docs case, judge rules
The dismissal of criminal charges against Donald Trump for concealing classified records at Mar-a-Lago eliminated a significant barrier to making records about the probe public, a federal judge ruled Monday.
U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell said Trump's election as president — which forced the end of the criminal case — combined with the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity mean Trump is effectively insulated from any criminal responsibility for his conduct.
That means the FBI's previous reasons for refusing to gather and disclose records related to the probe no longer apply, Howell wrote in a ruling in a Freedom of Information Act case brought by journalist Jason Leopold. She noted that while the dismissal of charges against Trump may have reduced his criminal exposure, it 'ironically' made him more susceptible to public scrutiny for his conduct.
'With the far dampened possibility of any criminal investigation to gather evidence about a president's conduct and of any public enforcement proceeding against a president, the [Supreme Court's] decision … has left a FOIA request as a critical tool for the American public to keep apprised of a president's conduct,' Howell ruled.
She ordered the FBI to comb its records for documents responsive to the FOIA request and confer with Leopold about a timetable for release, providing an update to the court by Feb. 20.
Howell's ruling comes amid an effort by public interest groups and congressional Democrats to access former special counsel Jack Smith's final report on Trump's concealment of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago after his first term. Trump faced dozens of felony charges in the case until they were dismissed by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who ruled last year that Smith's appointment was unlawful.
After Trump won reelection, the Justice Department dropped its effort to reinstate the charges, and DOJ last month moved to similarly drop efforts to continue the case against Trump's former two co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira.
Typically, the FBI refuses to 'confirm or deny' the existence of a criminal investigation, a response meant to protect the secrecy of ongoing investigations and the privacy of people who may not ultimately be charged. But Howell said that rationale — known as a Glomar response — no longer applies to documents contained in Trump's Mar-a-Lago file.
'In these circumstances, defendants' Glomar arguments crumble with no more weight than dust and just as little persuasiveness,' Howell wrote.
Howell noted that the investigators who led the Trump probe, whom she described as 'dedicated public servants who worked on and have the deepest knowledge of the facts underlying this investigation' had been 'summarily fired by the new Trump Administration.'
And Howell wrote with disdain for the high court's immunity ruling, quoting freely from the liberal justices' dissenting opinion that described it as a 'mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law.'
'Of course, while the Supreme Court has provided a protective and presumptive immunity cloak for a president's conduct, that cloak is not so large to extend to those who aid, abet and execute criminal acts behalf of a criminally immune president,' Howell added in a stinging footnote. 'The excuse offered after World War II by enablers of the fascist Nazi regime of 'just following orders' has long been rejected in this country's jurisprudence.'
Howell added that the ruling may have insulated the president criminally but could open doors to public records requests, given FOIA's command 'to allow the citizenry to 'know what its government is up to.''
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump aides want Texas to redraw its congressional maps to boost the GOP. What would that mean?
This coverage is made possible through Votebeat, a nonpartisan news organization covering local election administration and voting access. Sign up for Votebeat Texas' free newsletters here. Republicans representing Texas in Congress are considering this week whether to push their state Legislature to take the unusual step of redrawing district lines to shore up the GOP's advantage in the U.S. House. But the contours of the plan, including whether Gov. Greg Abbott would call a special session of the Legislature to redraw the maps, remain largely uncertain. The idea is being driven by President Donald Trump's political advisers, who want to draw up new maps that would give Republicans a better chance to flip seats currently held by Democrats, according to two GOP congressional aides familiar with the matter. That proposal, which would involve shifting GOP voters from safely red districts into neighboring blue ones, is aimed at safeguarding Republicans' thin majority in Congress, where they control the lower chamber, 220-212. The redistricting proposal, and the Trump team's role in pushing it, was first reported by The New York Times Monday. Without a Republican majority in Congress, Trump's legislative agenda would likely stall, and the president could face investigations from newly empowered Democratic committee chairs intent on scrutinizing the White House. Here's what we know about the plan so far: On Capitol Hill, members of the Texas GOP delegation huddled Monday night to discuss the prospect of reshaping their districts. Most of the 25-member group expressed reluctance about the idea, citing concerns about jeopardizing their districts in next year's midterms if the new maps overextended the GOP's advantage, according to the two GOP aides, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the private deliberations. Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Lubbock, was skeptical of the idea. 'We just recently worked on the new maps,' Arrington told The Texas Tribune. To reopen the process, he said, 'there'd have to be a significant benefit to our state.' The delegation has yet to be presented with mockups of new maps, two aides said. Each state's political maps must be redrawn once a decade, after each round of the U.S. census, to account for population growth and ensure every congressional and legislative district has roughly the same number of people. Texas lawmakers last overhauled their district lines in 2021. There's no federal law that prohibits states from redrawing district maps midcycle, said Justin Levitt, an election law professor at Loyola Marymount University and a former deputy assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice's civil rights division. Laws around the timing to redraw congressional and state district maps vary by state. In Texas, the state constitution doesn't specify timing, so the redrawing of maps is left to the discretion of the governor and the Legislature. Lawmakers gaveled out of their 140-day regular session last week, meaning they would need to be called back for a special session to change the state's political maps. Abbott has the sole authority to order overtime sessions and decide what lawmakers are allowed to consider. A trial is underway in El Paso in a long-running challenge to the state legislative and congressional district maps Texas drew after the 2020 U.S. Census. If Texas redraws its congressional maps, state officials would then ask the court to toss the claims challenging those districts 'that no longer exist,' Levitt said. The portion of the case over the state legislative district maps would continue. If the judge agrees, then both parties would have to file new legal claims for the updated maps. It isn't clear how much maps could change, but voters could find themselves in new districts, and Levitt said redrawing the lines in the middle of the redistricting cycle is a bad idea. 'If the people of Texas think that their representatives have done a bad job, then when the [district] lines change, they're not voting on those representatives anymore,' Levitt said. 'New people are voting on those representatives.' The National Democratic Redistricting Committee, Democrats' national arm for contesting state GOP mapmaking, said the proposal to expand Republicans' stronghold in Texas was 'yet another example of Trump trying to suppress votes in order to hold onto power.' 'Texas's congressional map is already being sued for violating the Voting Rights Act because it diminishes the voting power of the state's fast-growing Latino population,' John Bisognano, president of the NDRC said. 'To draw an even more extreme gerrymander would only assure that the barrage of legal challenges against Texas will continue.' When Republicans in charge of the Legislature redrew the district lines after the 2020 census, they focused on reinforcing their political support in districts already controlled by the GOP. This redistricting proposal would likely take a different approach. As things stand, Republicans hold 25 of the state's 38 congressional seats. Democrats hold 12 seats and are expected to regain control of Texas' one vacant seat in a special election this fall. Most of Texas' GOP-controlled districts lean heavily Republican: In last year's election, 24 of those 25 seats were carried by a Republican victor who received at least 60% of the vote or ran unopposed. The exception was U.S. Rep. Monica De La Cruz, R-Edinburg, who captured 57% of the vote and won by a comfortable 14-point margin. With little competition to speak of, The Times reported, Trump's political advisers believe at least some of those districts could bear the loss of GOP voters who would be reshuffled into neighboring, Democratic-held districts — giving Republican hopefuls a better chance to flip those seats from blue to red. The party in control of the White House frequently loses seats during midterm cycles, and Trump's team is likely looking to offset potential GOP losses in other states and improve the odds of holding on to a narrow House majority. Incumbent Republicans, though, don't love the idea of sacrificing a comfortable race in a safe district for the possibility of picking up a few seats, according to GOP aides. In 2003, after Texas Republicans initially left it up to the courts to draw new lines following the 2000 census, then-U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a Sugar Land Republican, embarked instead on a bold course of action to consolidate GOP power in the state. He, along with his Republican allies, redrew the lines as the opening salvo to a multistate redistricting plan aimed at accumulating power for his party in states across the country. Enraged by the power play, Democrats fled the state, depriving the Texas House of the quorum it needed to function. The rebels eventually relented under threat of arrest, a rare power in the Texas Constitution used to compel absent members back to return to Austin when the Legislature is in session. The lines were then redrawn, cementing the GOP majority the delegation has enjoyed in Washington for the past two decades. However, what's at play this time is different than in the early 2000s, when Republicans had a newfound majority in the Legislature and had a number of vulnerable Democratic incumbents they could pick off. Now, Republicans have been entrenched in the majority for decades and will have to answer the question of whether there's really more to gain, said Kareem Crayton, the vice president of the Brennan Center for Justice's Washington office. 'That's the tradeoff. You can do that too much so that you actually make them so competitive that the other side wins,' Crayton said. 'That's always a danger.' Texas Republicans are planning to reconvene Thursday to continue discussing the plan, according to Rep. Beth Van Duyne, R-Irving, and Rep. Wesley Hunt, R-Houston, who said they will attend the meeting. Members of Trump's political team are also expected to attend, according to Hunt and two GOP congressional aides familiar with the matter. Natalia Contreras is a reporter for Votebeat in partnership with the Texas Tribune. She's based in Corpus Christi. Contact Natalia at ncontreras@ Disclosure: New York Times has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here. Big news: 20 more speakers join the TribFest lineup! New additions include Margaret Spellings, former U.S. secretary of education and CEO of the Bipartisan Policy Center; Michael Curry, former presiding bishop and primate of The Episcopal Church; Beto O'Rourke, former U.S. Representative, D-El Paso; Joe Lonsdale, entrepreneur, founder and managing partner at 8VC; and Katie Phang, journalist and trial lawyer. Get tickets. TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Chicago Tribune
31 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Plaintiff in FOIA lawsuit won't accept former Dolton Mayor Tiffany Henyard's affidavit
An attorney for former Dolton Mayor Tiffany Henyard agreed Wednesday to amend an affidavit Henyard filed stating she does not possess documents sought through the Freedom of Information Act after the organization suing her claimed it did not meet state standards. Henyard's attorney, Beau Brindley, reached the agreement ahead of Wednesday's hearing held via Zoom after Cook County Judge Kate Moreland said Henyard would be fined $1,000 for each day she failed to either produce documents requested by the nonprofit Edgar County Watchdogs, or submit an affidavit explaining she didn't possess them. Despite being filed Tuesday, the affidavit is 'deficient … and must be disregarded,' attorneys for the Edgar County Watchdogs said in a response filed Wednesday. They said the affidavit does not include a certificate that it was made under penalty of perjury and that it lacks both specificity and credibility. Brindley said he had already begun amending the affidavit to meet the requirements and would work with the Edgar County Watchdogs' attorneys to ensure both sides were satisfied before filing the amended document. 'We can try to fix this thing so we can get it resolved, which is in everybody's best interest,' Brindley said. Edward 'Coach' Winehaus, one of the attorneys representing the Edgar County Watchdogs, told the Daily Southtown via email that he believes Moreland's fines will remain in effect until the amended affidavit is filed. That would mean that, as of Tuesday when the first affidavit was filed, Henyard would owe $8,000 in fines. Henyard was held in contempt of court last month 'for her repeated and flagrant violations of the court's orders' in the lawsuit the Edgar County Watchdogs filed against Dolton for FOIA violations during Henyard's tenure as mayor, according to an order Moreland filed Monday. At a hearing Friday at the Richard J. Daley Center in Chicago, Brindley told Moreland Henyard no longer had the documents. The affidavit filed Tuesday explained the steps Henyard took to look for the requested record, a document Henyard held up at a January public meeting as proof that trustees canceled a credit card. According to the affidavit, Henyard does not recall the document the organization requested or where it came from. She said she did not take any village documents with her when she left office and the document in question would remain in the possession of the village. 'After becoming aware of the requested documents, I searched all of my personal documents to ensure I had nothing related to the January meeting,' Henyard said in the affidavit. She said she also searched her email with terms related to the January meeting, such as 'credit card' and 'cancelled credit card,' without success, and sent emails to Mayor Jason House and Village Administrator Charles Walls requesting they locate the document. She said neither House nor Walls responded. 'I have no other mechanisms through which to seek a single document, the content of which I simply do not recall,' Henyard said in the affidavit. The Edgar County Watchdogs' attorneys said the affidavit failed to include steps taken to comply with the FOIA while Henyard was mayor, as was the case when they filed the lawsuit. 'If the 'search' was performed only recently, then the steps she performed when in office — such as potentially destroying the documents — would be available for testimony and therefore must be included in the affidavit if she hopes to purge the court's contempt order,' the response said. Edgar County Watchdogs filed its lawsuit in February 2024, a month after failing to receive those records along with copies of all credit card statements since Oct. 1, 2023. Dolton, which since last month has been under House's leadership, complied in providing the credit card statements but said they lacked the document Henyard held up at the January meeting. The Edgar County Watchdogs claim in the lawsuit the only response to their Jan. 5 FOIA requests came from Village Clerk Alison Key, informing them the village administrator at the time, Keith Freeman, instructed staff not to reply to requests that she entered. Henyard's tenure as mayor, which ended last month, showed a pattern of ignored or denied public records requests.
The Hill
33 minutes ago
- The Hill
ICE raids accelerate, protests spread
Evening Report is The Hill's P.M. newsletter. Sign up here or subscribe in the box below: Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters here THE WHITE HOUSE vowed Wednesday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids would continue 'unabated,' as protests spread from Los Angeles into other major American cities. Demonstrations have sprung up in Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, Chicago, Austin, Denver, San Francisco and other major cities. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) sought to rally the nation to his side, as U.S. Marines prepared to join National Guard troops dispatched to keep the peace in Los Angeles. 'This isn't just about protests here in Los Angeles,' Newsom said in a direct-to-camera address. 'This is about all of us. This is about you. California may be first, but it clearly will not end here. Other states are next. Democracy is next. Democracy is under assault before our eyes.' The White House warned protesters there would be consequences if demonstrations in other cities get out of hand. 'Let this be an unequivocal message to left-wing radicals in other parts of the country who might be thinking about copy-catting the violence in an effort to stop this administration's mass deportation efforts,' said press secretary Karoline Leavitt. 'You will not succeed. Any lawlessness will only strengthen this president's resolve to defend the majority of Americans who want to live their lives peacefully, free from the fear of violent criminal illegal aliens.' The New York Police Department said at least 80 people were arrested at anti-ICE protests in lower Manhattan on Tuesday night. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) deployed the National Guard to deal with protests in his state. 'Peaceful protest is legal,' Abbott posted on X. 'Harming a person or property is illegal & will lead to arrest. @TexasGuard will use every tool & strategy to help law enforcement maintain order.' ICE took more than 70 people into custody during an immigration enforcement operation at a meat packaging facility in Omaha. Leavitt said more than 330 people in the country illegally have been arrested in Los Angeles over the past few days, and that more than 100 had prior criminal convictions. 'This administration is going to continue the mass deportation effort that the president promised the American public,' she said. President Trump's border czar Tom Homan said the protests are making immigration raids and deportations 'difficult' and 'dangerous' for the officers seeking to carry them out. 'They're not going to stop us,' Homan told 'NBC Nightly News' anchor Tom Llamas. 'They're not going to slow us down.' Organizers with 'No Kings' are planning about 1,500 demonstrations across the country to protest the military parade scheduled for Saturday in D.C. to mark the Army's 250th birthday. It's also Trump's 79th birthday. Protests and boycotts could also be in effect tonight at the Kennedy Center, where Trump and first lady Melania Trump will attend a production of 'Les Misérables.' LOS ANGELES ON EDGE Hundreds of U.S. Marines are expected to be deployed soon alongside the thousands of National Guard troops in Los Angeles, which has been racked by vandalism, looting and some violent altercations with the police. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass (D) instituted an 8 p.m. curfew on Tuesday night, resulting in dozens of arrests for those who stayed out. Two men have been arrested for allegedly possessing Molotov cocktails. Attorney General Pam Bondi said Los Angeles is 'at a good point.' 'We're hoping it's going to get under control, we hope the curfew will work and we're going to continue to do everything we can to keep California safe if the government of California is not going to help them,' Bondi said. Newsom fumed at what he described as federal interference that furthered the chaos. 'This brazen abuse of power by a sitting president inflamed a combustible situation,' he said. A judge rejected Newsom's request to limit troop deployment, pending a Thursday hearing. The Department of Justice called Newsom's lawsuit a 'crass political stunt.' On Thursday, three Democratic governors from blue 'Sanctuary States' will testify before Congress: Govs. Tim Walz (Minn.), Kathy Hochul (New York) and JB Pritzker. 'Sanctuary cities and states will no longer be allowed to shield illegal criminal from deportation,' Leavitt said. 💡Perspectives: • American Conservative: Trump, Newsom play to their bases. Who will win? • Washington Post: Dems ignored the border. The consequences are here. • The Liberal Patriot: Both parties lose the plot on immigration. • The New York Times: The military may find itself in an impossible situation. • City Journal: Trump's unapologetic defense of the rule of law. Read more: • Trump team to send thousands of migrants to Guantanamo. • McIver indicted on federal charges for immigration center encounter. • Senate Dems spar with Hegseth over legality of Los Angeles deployments. • Dems rage against Trump's moves in LA, as some worry about optics. • GOP backs Trump on LA, but there's skepticism over deploying Marines. CATCH UP QUICK NEWS THIS AFTERNOON Trump, Musk talk reconciliation President Trump and Elon Musk are talking about reconciliation, days after their relationship imploded in a mess of threats and allegations. Early Wednesday morning, Musk expressed regret over the feud, which he escalated by alleging Trump had ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. 'I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week,' Musk wrote just after 3 a.m. EDT. 'They went too far.' Trump, who threatened to end government contracts for Musk's companies, was asked if he could reconcile with Musk. 'I guess I could,' Trump said in a podcast interview. 'But you know, we have to straighten out the country. Yeah, and my sole function now is getting this country back to a level higher than it's ever been.' Trump said he was mostly upset at Musk for trying to sink his 'big, beautiful bill.' Musk has been raging at the levels of spending and debt in the Trump agenda bill ever since his time at the White House leading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) came to an end. 'I have no hard feelings,' Trump told the New York Post's Miranda Devine. 'I was really surprised that that happened,' Trump continued. 'He went after a bill… And when he did that, I was not a happy camper.' The New York Times reports that Trump and Musk spoke on the phone ahead of Musk's expression of regret. The latest on the 'big, beautiful bill'… Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) says he'll keep senators in Washington during the July 4 recess to complete work on Trump's agenda bill by the self-imposed deadline. House Republicans are teeing up changes to the bill, with intent of voting later this week. The Hill's Mychael Schnell and Emily Brooks explain: 'The tweaks come after the Senate parliamentarian reviewed the sprawling package and identified provisions that do not comply with the upper chamber's procedural requirements for using the budget reconciliation process, which allows Republicans to circumvent a Democratic filibuster and approve the legislation by simple majority.' MEANWHILE… A pair of House panels voted to advance legislation laying out oversight of the crypto market, amid opposition from Democrats. And House Republicans advanced legislation that calls for more than $450 billion to fund the Department of Veterans Affairs, military construction and other programs for fiscal 2026. It's the first of the 12 annual funding bills House GOP appropriators are hoping to move out of committee before Congress leaves for its August recess. 💡Perspectives: • The Spectator: The tech-MAGA alliance is far from over. • Very Serious: A terrible field of New York mayoral candidates. • The Hill: Trump, Congress can end abuse of taxpayers by PBS and NPR. • The Guardian: Trump wages war against U.S. citizens. • MSNBC: Americans prep for nationwide 'No Kings' rallies. Read more: • House GOP schedule interviews with former Biden aides. • Foreign investors recoil from 'discriminatory' tax in Trump's big bill. • 5 takeaways from the New Jersey primaries. • Sergio Gor cements himself as 'vital' part of Trump's White House. • Most voters in favor of Trump's 'most favored nation' drug price policy. IN OTHER NEWS US, China agree to new trade framework U.S. and Chinese officials announced an agreement in principle on a new trade framework after three days of meetings in London. The deal effectively restores a previous agreement, which the U.S. had accused China of breaking. Both countries will lower tariffs and roll back export controls on goods that are critical to technology. The deal still must be signed off on by President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. Trump said over Truth Social the U.S. would impose 55 percent tariffs on Chinese goods, while China would impose a 10 percent tariff on U.S. products. In addition, China will supply magnets and 'any necessary rare earths,' while the U.S. will draw back restrictions on Chinese students attending U.S. universities, Trump said. Trump enjoyed a raft of good news on trade and the economy on Wednesday. An appeals court ruled that the bulk of Trump's tariffs can remain in place for now, extending a pause after a different court ruled the tariffs were illegal. 'A great and important win for the U.S.,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. And the latest Consumer Price Index (CPI) data showed inflation coming in lower than expected, contrary to economic forecasts that predicted tariffs would provoke a spike in inflation. Trump has openly pressured Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell to lower interest rates, but Powell has refused, citing uncertainty from the trade wars. Vice President Vance ripped the Fed on Wednesday, saying Trump has been proven right. 'The president has been saying this for a while, but it's even more clear: the refusal by the Fed to cut rates is monetary malpractice,' Vance posted on X. 💡Perspectives: • The Hill: Military spending is out of control. • The New Republic: The audacity of Trump's self-dealing. • USA Today: Progressives are destroying Democratic norms. • Wall Street Journal: Newsom positions himself as leader of the opposition. • The Economist: Is there a woke right? Read more: • GM investing $4 billion in production shift to US. Someone forward this newsletter to you? Sign up to get your own copy: See you next time!
