Name: Trump Attends Florida Hearing on Motions to Dismiss Documents Case
Uploaded: 2024-03-14T18:40:28.000Z
Description: FORT PIERCE, Fla.—Roughly 24 hours after a Georgia judge dropped some of the charges filed against him there, former President Donald Trump's attorneys will argue in a Florida court that the federal classified documents case should be thrown out.

NTD Newsroom comprises teams of reporters, editors, and producers assigned to cover breaking news and other stories.


NTD Newsroom

NTD Plus

News

News you can trust from the U.S. and around the world. Critical information and insight. We cover the stories that others don’t. NTD News Today airs Monday–Friday at 11 a.m. ET.

NTD News Today

Meta Expands Teen Content Controls Globally

Andrew Thomas is a reporter for NTD News primarily covering business, the economy, and technology. 

Andrew Thomas

Amazon to Hold Annual Prime Day Sales in June

US, UK Soldiers Die During Training Exercise in Iraq

Draft Bill Bars US Troops From Prediction Market Bets

Trump Administration Proposes New Tariff on Brazilian Imports

Jack Phillips is a breaking news reporter with 15 years experience who started as a local New York City reporter. Having joined The Epoch Times' news team in 2009, Jack was born and raised near Modesto in California's Central Valley. 

Jack Phillips

Iris Tao is NTD's White House correspondent based in Washington. Prior to her work at the White House, Iris reported on U.S. politics and U.S.–China relations from NTD’s New York headquarters. She holds degrees in journalism and economics from Boston University.

Iris Tao

US News

Politics

Donald Trump

Trump Disputes Media Reports Iran Negotiations Were Cut Off

US Hosts Latest Round of Israeli-Lebanese Peace Talks

Court Hears Arguments Over Efforts to Halt Trump’s Mail-In Voting Executive Order

Britain's Silk Ribbon Weaving Industry Is Fading Away

Supreme Court Rules Florida Can't Sue California Over Business Tax Policy

Stefania Cox is an NTD News anchor and national correspondent based at the network's global headquarters in New York City. Stefania anchors "NTD Newsroom," and co-anchors "NTD News Today" weekdays at 10:00 am ET.

Stefania Cox

NTD News Today Full Broadcast (June 3)

NTD News Today Full Broadcast (June 2)

NTD News Today Full Broadcast (June 1)

NTD News Today Full Broadcast (May 29)

NTD News Today Full Broadcast (May 28)

Kevin Hogan is an NTD News data reporter and national correspondent based at the network's global headquarters in New York City. Kevin covers breaking news, as well as U.S. and global current events. He conveys the news through data visualizations and investigates pressing issues.

Kevin Hogan

NTD News Today Full Broadcast (May 27)

NTD News Today Full Broadcast (May 26)

NTD News Today Full Broadcast (May 25)

NTD News Today Full Broadcast (May 22)

NTD News Today Full Broadcast (May 21)

The Associated Press is an American not-for-profit news agency headquartered in New York City. 

The Associated Press

State News

California

More Than 17,000 Under Evacuation Orders as Southern California Wildfire Threatens Homes

Rudy Blalock is a Southern California-based daily news reporter for NTD. Originally from Michigan, he moved to California in 2017 and the sunshine and ocean have kept him here since. In his free time, he may be found underwater scuba diving, on top of a mountain hiking or snowboarding, or at home meditating—which helps fuel his active lifestyle.

Rudy Blalock

40,000 Ordered to Evacuate as Chemical Tank Leaks, Threatens Explosion in California

Video of US Fighter Jet Shooting Down UFO Over Lake Huron Emerges in New Pentagon Files

Ryan Morgan is a reporter for The Epoch Times focusing on military and foreign affairs. He was previously a news writer for NTD. 


Ryan Morgan

Mari Otsu is NTD's White House correspondent based in Washington. 

Mari Otsu

World News

Middle East

Iran

3 US Warships Fend Off Iranian Attacks, Trump Says Ceasefire Still Holds

US Government Sues Chick-fil-A Over Religious Rights

Sports News

Kyle Busch, Two-Time NASCAR Champion, Dies at 41

Haika Mrema

Medical Plane Crash in New Mexico Mountains Kills 4, Sparks Wildfire

Daniel Monaghan is a reporter for NTD News covering culture, social issues, and education. He holds a BA in Political Science and Government.

Daniel Monaghan

California Mayor Resigns, Will Plead Guilty to Acting as Chinese Agent

Jackson Richman is a Washington correspondent for The Epoch Times. In addition to Washington politics, he covers the intersection of politics and sports/sports and culture. He previously was a writer at Mediaite and Washington correspondent at Jewish News Syndicate. His writing has also appeared in The Washington Examiner. He is an alum of George Washington University.

Jackson Richman

Iranian Strikes on UAE, Ships Amid US Operation to Open Hormuz Strait Test Ceasefire

Reuters is a news agency owned by Thomson Reuters. It employs around 2,500 journalists and 600 photojournalists in about 200 locations worldwide writing in 16 languages.

Reuters

Trump Calls Iran's Response to Latest US Ceasefire Proposal 'Totally Unacceptable'

FORT PIERCE, Fla.—Roughly 24 hours after a Georgia judge dropped some of the charges filed against him there, former President Donald Trump's attorneys will argue in a Florida court that the federal classified documents case should be thrown out.

President Trump on March 14 arrived at the courthouse to appear before U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon in Fort Pierce, Florida, as his attorneys argue two of the four motions they filed to dismiss charges against him. One motion argues that 32 charges should be dropped due to "unconstitutional vagueness," and the other argues the entire superseding indictment should be thrown out pursuant to the Presidential Records Act (PRA).

National security files were routinely taken by past presidents, President Trump's attorneys said in their argument for unconstitutional vagueness, "and no one suggested that their possession and retention was 'unauthorized' as discussed in President Trump's motion relating to selective and vindictive prosecution."

The indictment came last year when President Trump, his valet Walt Nauta, and his Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira were charged after the Department of Justice (DOJ) alleged he mishandled classified documents, which he retained from his time in the White House, in his Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Florida.

The DOJ's prosecution team for this case, led by special counsel Jack Smith, vehemently opposed both of these motions to dismiss and will also appear at the Alto Lee Adams Sr. Courthouse to argue their side. They refrained from calling him "President Trump" in their written arguments.

"Trump is charged with unauthorized possession and willful retention of national defense information," the prosecution said in its opposition to the vagueness argument. "The statute’s prohibitions are clear. As a former President, Trump could not have failed to understand the paramount importance of protecting the Nation’s national-security and military secrets, including the obligations not to take unauthorized possession of, or willfully retain national defense information."
<h2>Presidential Records Act</h2>
On Feb. 22, the former president and his attorneys, Todd Blanche and Christopher Kise, filed a motion to dismiss his case on the basis of the PRA.

In the <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24478991-trumps-motion-to-dismiss-the-indictment-based-on-the-presidential-records-act" target="_blank" rel="noopener">motion</a>, they argue the PRA "conferred unreviewable discretion on President Trump to designate the records at issue as personal," and therefore, "President Trump's possession of those records was not 'unauthorized.'"

Secondly, Mr. Blanche and Mr. Kise argue that the "PRA's exclusive remedy for records collection efforts by NARA is civil in nature and forecloses criminal investigations," referring to the National Archives and Records Administration.

His attorneys concluded that the counts charging President Trump "in the Superseding Indictment fail to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(3)(v) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure."

"Accordingly, pursuant to the PRA, the Superseding Indictment must be dismissed," they added.

In <a href="https://admin4.theepochtimes.com/assets/uploads/2024/03/13/id5606993-gov.uscourts.flsd_.648652.373.0_2.pdf">opposition</a>, DOJ prosecutors Jay Bratt and David Harbach assert that "Trump's claims rest on three fundamental errors, all of which reflect his view that, as a former President, the Nation's laws and principles of accountability that govern every other citizen do not apply to him."

Specifically, prosecutors say the PRA "prohibits the unauthorized possession and willful retention of national defense information."

"Even if the raft of highly classified documents that Trump took from the White House to Mar-a-Lago were somehow categorized as 'personal' under the PRA, that would not render his retention of those documents 'authorized,'" they added.

Prosecutors say the "authorization for a former President to possess classified information comes from the applicable executive order—not from the PRA—and Trump was not authorized to possess classified records at all," let alone in "unsecured locations at Mar-a-Lago."

They also assert that the "charged documents are indisputably presidential, not personal, and Trump offers no basis to conclude otherwise."

Lastly, prosecutors argue President Trump is wrong when he suggests that the PRA's "civil remedy for recovering presidential records preempts the Justice Department's authority to investigate and enforce criminal law."

Instead, the DOJ claims the "civil remedy" of the PRA solidifies "Congress's determination that the United States owns presidential records" and not the sitting president or former president.

President Trump and his attorneys filed a <a href="https://admin4.theepochtimes.com/assets/uploads/2024/03/13/id5606995-gov.uscourts.flsd_.648652.399.0.pdf">reply brief</a> on March 13 in support of the motion to dismiss his indictment based on the PRA, responding to the DOJ's opposition.

His attorneys claim the documents in question were designated as "personal records" pursuant to the PRA, and therefore, the DOJ is "foreclosed as a matter of law" from establishing that the former president's retention of those records was "unauthorized."

They also say that "DOJ, NARA, and even the Biden Administration's White House Counsel" have adopted similar positions by arguing that "PRA designations by former presidents and vice presidents are not reviewable in criminal proceedings."

Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) (on screen) accuses former Special Counsel Robert K. Hur of being critical of President Joe Biden in an effort to get former President Donald Trump reelected as he testifies before the House Judiciary Committee in Washington on March 12, 2024. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Therefore, his attorneys believe the DOJ's contrary position is "meritless."

The defense also claims NARA's actions were "politically motivated" and "driven by the Biden Administration as a political weapon" against President Trump. Therefore, he states NARA's February 2022 referral to investigate the withheld documents is a "sham," and its May 2022 "rejection of President Trump's executive privilege claim violated the Administrative Procedure Act."

Lastly, he and his attorneys claim there were not "reasonable grounds to believe there had been a violation of Federal criminal law" because of the "unbroken chain of custom and history of NARA inaction with respect to PRA records designations."

They argued that former President Bill Clinton permitted Taylor Branch to write about tapes containing classified information and that the DOJ and NARA "hardly lifted a finger in response."

If the DOJ's current position didn't apply to President Clinton, President Trump believes it shouldn't apply to him either.

"The Special Counsel's Office should not be permitted to predicate an unlawful prosecution on a contrary interpretation of the PRA," his attorneys wrote.
<h2>'Unconstitutional Vagueness'</h2>
The former president’s lawyers also argued that the section of the U.S. Code used for the charges was void due to vagueness under the vagueness doctrine.

According to Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute, the vagueness doctrine is "a constitutional rule that requires criminal laws to state explicitly and definitely what conduct is punishable. Criminal laws that violate this requirement are said to be void for vagueness. Vagueness doctrine rests on the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution."

The intention is to require "fair notice of what is punishable" in order to "prevent arbitrary enforcement of the laws."

The statute in question, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793" target="_blank" rel="noopener">18 U.S. Code § 793(e</a>), states, in part, "Whoever having unauthorized possession of ... any document ... relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation ... willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it ... Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

The defense argued that the wording is too vague, specifically around the alleged undefined clauses "unauthorized possession," "relating to the national defense," and "entitled to receive it." They argued that President Trump was operating within the framework of the PRA, acted as "the ultimate Original Classification Authority," has executive privilege, and "is entitled to immunity for his official acts."

They also specifically asked that "Count 19" be dismissed because they said President Trump maintained the necessary security clearance during the time alleged in the indictment.

However, the prosecution asked that the motion be rejected, arguing that President Trump had full knowledge of the fact he was no longer authorized to possess the documents, nor did he charge any of them while he was president, and he willfully retained them.

They also argue that the documents were clearly related to national defense, as they allegedly included classified information on the defense and weapons capabilities of the United States, its nuclear programs, and the vulnerabilities of the nation and its allies.

They also argued that the PRA does not authorize a former president to possess classified information.

"These assertions stem from Trump's pervasive claim that his former service as president somehow exempts him from the laws and principles of accountability that govern every other citizen," the prosecution said in its written response.

Former President Donald Trump leaves Trump Tower for Manhattan federal court to attend his defamation trial in New York on Jan. 26, 2024. (Charly Triballeau /AFP via Getty Images)

President Trump's attorneys filed a <a href="https://admin4.theepochtimes.com/assets/uploads/2024/03/14/id5607001-gov.uscourts.flsd_.648652.398.0.pdf">reply brief</a> on March 13 to the prosecution's opposition, doubling down on their previous position. They argued the special counsel's office ignores legislative history and its claim that the "statutes prohibitions are clear" is "baseless and untenable."

"The Court will be writing on what is essentially a blank slate in the Eleventh Circuit, against the backdrop of the Supreme Court's recent retrenchment on using 'judicial gloss' to save statutes that Congress should have written more clearly," the defense said. "Judicial gloss" essentially refers to the judges' previous interpretation of a vague statute rather than hard-defined legislation.

They reaffirmed that "President Trump's retention of the documents was not 'unauthorized' under § 793(e) because he designated them as personal records pursuant to the PRA during his first term in Office." And they said the statute offers no clarity regarding who is "entitled to receive" the personal records of a former president at that point.

They also argued that "the alleged sensitivity of documents when they allegedly passed through the Oval Office says nothing with respect to whether President Trump was authorized to retain them, the scope of the NDI Clause, and who was entitled to receive the personal records of a former President for the first time in history."

As with "Count 19," the defense once again stood its ground but also asked that the court conduct a hearing regarding President Trump's alleged "Q" clearance and resolve any factual disputes.
<h2>6 Charges Dropped in Georgia Case</h2>
President Trump had six of his 41 charges <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/georgia-judge-dismisses-6-counts-in-trump-indictment-5606610?ea_src=ai_recommender&ea_med=desktop_news" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dropped</a> in his Georgia racketeering case on March 13 after he and his co-defendants filed several demurrers, or formal challenges to pleadings by the prosecution.

Three of the charges dropped by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee relate to a phone call the former president made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger on Jan. 2, 2021.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis at the Fulton County Courthouse in Atlanta, Ga., on March 1, 2024. (Alex Slitz/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

Judge McAfee made his ruling days ahead of an <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/georgia-judge-expected-to-rule-on-fani-willis-disqualification-this-week-heres-what-we-know-5606597" target="_blank" rel="noopener">expected decision</a> on a motion to disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from prosecuting the case after she was accused of an alleged improper relationship with a special prosecutor and an alleged misuse of public funds in the case.

Despite the charges, and with no other challengers left in the race, President Trump stands to officially become the Republican Party's nominee for president in the 2024 election. <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/bulk-of-republicans-locked-in-on-support-for-trump-5594803" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Recent exit polls</a> continue to show that Republican voters still deem him eligible to be president despite any hypothetical conviction.

<em>From <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/trump-expected-to-attend-florida-hearing-on-motions-to-dismiss-documents-case-5606824">The Epoch Times</a></em>

Latest

trump

Videos

01_Lead Story

04_Top Stories

Premium Picks

Latest Clips

Management

FBI Trump Raid

Arleen Richards is NTD's legal correspondent based at the network's global headquarters in New York City, where she covers all major legal stories. Arleen holds a Doctor of Law (J.D.).


Arleen Richards

2024 Elections

Trump Indictments

Jacob Burg reports on the state of Florida for The Epoch Times. He covers a variety of topics including crime, politics, science, education, wildlife, family issues, and features. He previously wrote about sports, politics, and breaking news for the Sarasota Herald Tribune.

Jacob Burg

Latest and breaking news, documentaries, movies, and lifestyle content on NTD+.
 
Empower your knowledge and elevate your spirit with NTD+, your go-to destination for truthful news, insightful documentaries, and captivating lifestyle content that enriches your life.