John Bates Holds Hearing on Presidential Records Act Compliance
U.S. District Judge John Bates held a hearing Wednesday on a request to order the Trump administration to follow the presidential records act while the case proceeds. The dispute centers on whether presidential records must be preserved and then turned over to the National Archives under the law.
President Donald Trump has long resisted record-preservation demands. During his first term, White House employees taped torn documents back together for archiving, and staff sometimes found clumped-up paper with his handwriting on it in toilets, including on some foreign trips.
Records Act and White House practice
The Presidential Records Act of 1978 requires presidents’ records to be preserved while they are in office and transferred to the National Archives once their terms end. According to several advisers, Trump told National Archives officials, “It’s not theirs; it’s mine.”
A former senior Trump official said, “He didn’t want a record of anything” and “He never stopped ripping things up.” Maggie Haberman described Trump as periodically throwing print paper into the toilet during his first term.
Justice Department opinion
Last month, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel released an opinion declaring the Presidential Records Act unconstitutional. The opinion said that Congress cannot preserve presidential records merely for the sake of posterity and that the law infringes on “the constitutional independence and autonomy of the Executive.” It concluded that “the President need not further comply with its dictates.”
That opinion prompted two lawsuits seeking to require the White House to follow the law. One was filed by the American Historical Association and American Oversight. The other was filed by the Freedom of the Press Foundation and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
John Bates Hearing
On Wednesday, Bates heard a request that he order the administration to comply with the records law while the case moves ahead. The American Historical Association lawsuit says there is “a clear danger that official government records of the highest importance will be irretrievably lost.”
The same lawsuit says, “This case is about the preservation of records that document our nation’s history, and whether the American people are able to access and learn from that history.” The hearing puts that dispute before the court while the broader legal challenge continues.
Mar-a-Lago Records Dispute
The issue also follows the later dispute over boxes from the White House found crammed into a bathroom at Mar-a-Lago next to a toilet and below a crystal chandelier. After Trump left office, he was investigated by special counsel Jack Smith and charged with improper retention of classified documents.
Those charges were eventually dismissed by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon on the ground that Smith had been improperly appointed. The records-law case now tests whether the White House must preserve the material while the challenge is still being litigated.
