Capitol riot committee can see Trump White House records, court finds

A District of Columbia federal judge has rejected former president Donald Trump’s request to block the House of Representatives select committee investigating the 6 January insurrection from accessing a tranche of White House records held by the National Archives.

In an opinion issued on 9 November, US District Judge Tanya Chutkan ruled that the committee probing the events leading up to and surrounding the assault on Congress — the worst attack on the Capitol since 1814 — will be able to access telephone records, visitor logs and other documents generated during the Trump administration.

Mr Trump filed the lawsuit last month after White House Counsel Dana Remus informed him that President Joe Biden would not be honouring his request to use executive privilege, a legal doctrine which protects deliberations between and among the president and his advisers, to shield Trump administration records sought by the select committee.

According to White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, Mr Biden decided to not honour his predecessor’s request because Mr Trump “abused the office of the presidency and attempted to subvert a peaceful transfer of power, something that had happened between democratic and Republican presidencies for decades and decades throughout history”.

“The former president’s actions represented a unique and existential threat to our democracy that we don’t feel can be swept under the rug, and as President Biden determined … the constitutional protections of executive privilege should not be used to shield information,” Ms Psaki said.

In her opinion, Judge Chutkan noted that Mr Biden had decided not to invoke executive privilege over the documents, and said under prior Supreme Court rulings, that decision should be “accorded greater weight” than Mr Trump’s wishes.

“Plaintiff does not acknowledge the deference owed to the incumbent President’s judgment. His position that he may override the express will of the executive branch appears to be premised on the notion that his executive power ‘exists in perpetuity.’ … But Presidents are not kings, and Plaintiff is not President. He retains the right to assert that his records are privileged, but the incumbent President ‘is not constitutionally obliged to honor’ that assertion,” she wrote.

More follows…