Presidential Records Act v. Espionage Act
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (37)
sorted by:
Your counterargument falls apart under Article 2 of the Constitution, which vests ALL executive powers in the President. The president ultimately has the authority to dictate to all agencies beneath him what is and is not vital to national security, and what is or is not an authorized location. The agencies do not hold authority over the President. The 102 documents he took with him, if they are all pertaining to the alphabet soup spying on him during his campaign, were declassified before he left office.
Additionally, the 2012 case law resulting from the sock drawer case establishes that it is the President's responsibility and sole authority to separate personal records from presidential records. No other agency under the executive branch can supersede that authority.
You make this seem like it happens on the fly. Presidents still have to follow laws and executive orders.
Which means they'll be evidence of if certain things happened or there won't be. It's not a constitutional argument.
It's an argument of did this happen before he left the presidency or not.
The indictment alleges at all 31 documents are classified to this day.
Also Trump's lawyers do not think the sock drawer case applies here.
Only where laws and executive orders apply to them. If there is no legal procedure which concerns the de-classification of documents, then it stands to reason that the President only needs to give the order, which has been proven to be done for at least some of the documents that were seized.
I would think the grand jury would have included testimony on classification.