Former President Donald Trump has been granted permission by a federal court to name a “special master” to examine documents that the FBI confiscated from Mar-a-Lago last month.
The ruling by District Judge Aileen Cannon, who was chosen by Trump, is a huge win for the former President who has been critical of the Biden administration and Justice Department ever since the search was carried out four weeks ago.
A third-party lawyer from outside the government was to be brought in to examine the documents that were taken from Trump’s Florida residence and resort, per Cannon’s directive. Additionally, the decision suspends the Justice Department’s investigation into the Mar-a-Lago documents “until the conclusion of the special master’s examination or additional Court direction.”
However, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence will be permitted to continue the classification review and intelligence assessments.
The deadline for both parties to propose special master candidates and their tasks is this Friday.
Because they don’t expect the Justice Department to appropriately identify privileged data that would need to be removed from the ongoing criminal investigation, Trump’s attorneys claimed that a special master was required.
The Justice Department and the seizure were criticized by Trump during his rally this weekend in Pennsylvania.
He predicted a backlash beyond anything the world has ever seen in response to this gross violation of the law. “The heinous raid on my house was carried out by the same individuals from Justice and the FBI, as well as some outside vermin. They must be stopped because they just keep happening.”
Trump, according to Cannon, had not established that his constitutional rights had been violated.
According to the Government, “The Court agrees that, at least based on the material to far, there has not been a strong demonstration of callous disregard for Plaintiff’s constitutional rights,” she stated.
The special master will be entrusted, according to the judge, with looking through “seized property for personal items and documents and possibly privileged material subject to claims of attorney-client and executive privilege.”
“The Court is mindful that limitations on criminal prosecutions are not generally preferred,” said Cannon, “but finds that these exceptional circumstances call for a lengthy halt to allow for neutral, third-party assessment to guarantee a just process with proper protections.”