ALT: According to Ken Paxton, the court must order Jack Smith to protect documents from the destruction of a Trump probe because of a picture of a paper shredder truck outside the DOJ.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is once again requesting that a federal court grant an emergency order for the U.S. Department of Justice to preserve any documents and data related to the investigation of President-elect Donald Trump by special counsel Jack Smith. After claiming that a truck that shreds paper was parked in front of the DOJ headquarters, Paxton made his most recent request.
Paxton filed a move in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas’s Amarillo Division on Thursday, requesting a temporary restraining order or preservation.
According to the complaint, the plaintiffs ask for a preservation order because, given the defendants’ prior actions, it is a necessary, modest, and enforceable protection to make sure the defendants follow the law and don’t do the plaintiffs any irreversible harm. Crucially, this case is not merely a retrial of the past; defendants are currently engaging in a number of actions that pose a significant danger of document destruction. A few days ago, pictures of a document shredder truck parked outside DOJ offices went viral.
Paxton first requested a wide range of records and conversations pertaining to the special counsel’s investigations into Trump’s actions under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), as Law&Crime has reported. In response, he filed a motion requesting that the court forbid Smith and his group from deleting documents in order to evade responsibility.
In response to Paxton’s initial filings, the DOJ said that it is dedicated to upholding the law and maintaining its records.
However, Paxton, a fervent Trump supporter, has long criticized the president-elect’s investigations and ensuing convictions as being driven by politics. He accuses the Justice Department of being evasive about his request for records and asserts that the department has a history of handling important records improperly.
According to Thursday’s filing, this Court has the power to uphold transparency in order to preserve public confidence. The public needs to know the truth about Jack Smith’s probe, which was a political and legal disgrace. Furthermore, Jack Smith’s crew cannot be allowed to escape responsibility. The plaintiffs just want a preservation order that guarantees important records are kept intact, which is a simple and useful safety. This approach protects Plaintiffs and the public from irreversible harm while placing no significant burden on Defendants.
In his initial filing, Paxton baselessly asserted that the court s intervention was required because the investigations themselves were unlawful, as were the actions of investigators involved in the probes. He alleged that without a court order, the DOJ would simply destroy the records he had requested, saying that Smith s team had conducted itself in multiple ways that suggest it cannot be blindly trusted to preserve, and eventually produce, all of its records.
Smith earlier this monthformally began winding downthe federal criminal investigations against Trump due to the DOJ s long-standing policy against prosecuting a sitting president.
Paxton is no new to the controversies surrounding FOIA. The nonpartisan government watchdog group American Oversight has been seeking emails Paxton sent around the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection and communications with gun industry lobbyists following the mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, for years. Earlier this year, a Texas appellate court found in favor of the watchdog group, which claimed that the requests were denied. That case is still pending.
Paxton’s court documents follow a letter from Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, to Smith expressing the committee’s concern that the special counsel’s office might try to delete documents and information that were pertinent to the committee’s request.
According to Jordan, you should interpret this preservation notice as a directive to take all appropriate precautions against the willful or inadvertent destruction or alteration of any documents, communications, and other information—including electronic data and metadata—that are or may be relevant to this congressional investigation.
Do you have a tip we ought to know?[email protected]
Note: Every piece of content is rigorously reviewed by our team of experienced writers and editors to ensure its accuracy. Our writers use credible sources and adhere to strict fact-checking protocols to verify all claims and data before publication. If an error is identified, we promptly correct it and strive for transparency in all updates, feel free to reach out to us via email. We appreciate your trust and support!