Dem
47
GOP
53
Well, OK, not directly. Still, it is fair to say that (Z) has now joined the oh-so-exclusive club of people who are, or have been, connected to a lawsuit involving Donald Trump.
We noted, earlier this week, that the Trump-subservient DoJ announced that it's looked at the Presidential Records Act—a law passed by Congress—and decided that it's not actually valid. And so, Donald Trump is free to take any and all paperwork he wants to take with him when he leaves office. He can fill 100 bathrooms at Mar-a-Lago with boxes, if that is what he wants to do.
Initially, we observed that while "the Department of Justice said my behavior was lawful" is a pretty good defense in many cases, it's not too likely to work with a judge when that DoJ has shown itself to be utterly subservient to politics, and not at all independent. So, Trump better think long and hard if he decides to flout the law again, because the next AG/special counsel would likely file in D.C. and not south Florida. That means "Judge" Aileen Cannon would not be making the decisions.
What we should also have noted is that this announcement was colossally stupid (a phrase we never thought we'd use as often as we do these days). If the goal is to give Trump some sort of legal cover for doing what he so badly wants to do, the smart play was to wait until the waning days of his administration, and THEN make the announcement. We can only assume that the decision to announce NOW was because some sycophant at the DoJ is auditioning to replace Pam Bondi, and was trying to make nice with the President.
In any case, announcing now means there is time for people to react, whether in Congress (ha!) or in court. And so, the American Historical Association (AHA), which includes (Z) as a member, has filed suit, seeking to keep Trump from taking his paperwork with him when he leaves office. The AHA is joined in the suit by the watchdog group American Oversight.
The AHA is a good choice here, because they clearly have an interest in keeping the documents available, and so should be able to establish standing. On the whole, federal courts do not issue advisory opinions, which could theoretically mean that the AHA would have to wait until Trump actually broke the law. However, the good news for the historians is that he already did break the law once. Further, courts sometimes will issue an opinion if it appears an issue is imminent, even if it hasn't come to pass. Chiles v. Salazar, the conversion therapy case, was preemptive like this, in that the rights that Chiles claims had not yet actually been violated.
So, you will likely see Trump facing off against a bunch of angry historians in court. And if he thinks the ayatollahs are scary, well, he hasn't seen what an angry historian is like. He won't like them when they're angry. Meanwhile, maybe this will teach Trump that sometimes, obeisant sycophants do not actually have his best interests in mind... OK, probably not. (Z)