Trump/Mar-a-Lago Warrant Was Sealed - Judicial Watch, New York Times and Times Union Move to Unseal
As I suggested two days ago, the Trump/FBI/Mar-a-Lago warrant was, in fact, sealed by court order from the beginning, and all of the talking heads saying that Trump could show us the warrant if he wanted to were… maybe… wrong?
Washington Post: “The former president has a copy; he should make it public.”
Politico: “Trump’s lawyers have the warrant and a detailed manifest of what the FBI took away. Why haven’t they been released?”
MSNBC: “Donald Trump could, in theory, voluntarily release the FBI search warrant used at Mar-a-Lago. Some are challenging him to do exactly that.”
Here are the docket entries showing that the warrant was in fact sealed, meaning that even Trump and his lawyers would be prohibited from releasing copies of the warrant.
Motions to unseal the warrant, the return, and supporting materials were filed yesterday (August 10, 2022) by Judicial Watch, Times Union, and the New York Times.
The New York Times, in its motion, indicated its belief that: “Southern District of Florida practice is typically to seal search warrant matters at least until the warrant is executed, but not in perpetuity.” Now that the warrant has been executed, NYT argues: “with so much publicity surrounding the search, the Court should be skeptical about government claims that disclosure of this true information will invade privacy, disturb the confidentiality of an investigation, tip off potential witnesses, or lead to the destruction of evidence.”
Judicial Watch argues: “As of the filing of this motion, the public record consists solely of speculation and inuendo. In short, the historical presumption of access to warrant materials vastly outweighs any interest the government may have in keeping the materials under seal,” and concludes that: “it is essential that the public understands as soon as possible the basis for the government’s action. Any government interest in securing the identities of witnesses and confidential sources, if any, may be addressed by appropriate redactions from the search warrant affidavit.”
Times Union argues that “"a district court's discretion to seal the record of judicial proceedings ‘is to be exercised charily,’ and that it is inappropriate to indefinitely seal a warrant affidavit,” and concludes that: “Given that the search warrant(s) have been executed, and the target of that search has full knowledge of what occurred, there is no impediment to any ongoing investigation from the disclosure of the search warrant order or the returns. As such, these records should be unsealed.”
The court has ordered the government to respond to the motions to unseal by August 15, 2022, adding that: “The response may be filed ex parte and under seal as necessary to avoid disclosing matters already under seal. In that event, the Government shall file a redacted Response in the public record.”
Trump’s lawyer, Christina Bobb, appeared on Real America’s Life / America’s Voice Live, and stated that FBI agents at first refused to even show her the warrant, but then they “conceded and let me see it, but they did not give me a copy of it right away.”
I will keep you posted as to the government’s response and any ruling from the court.
(UPDATE: 2022.08.11 3:28pm - US Government Also Files Motion to Unseal The Warrant and Return, But Asks For All Other Warrant Related Materials - the Application and Supporting Affidavit(s) - to Remain Sealed. Copy of Government Motion to Unseal Here.)