[House Report 117-491]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


117th Congress    }                                   {     Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session       }                                   {     117-491

======================================================================
 
 RESOLUTION OF INQUIRY REQUESTING THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTING ATTORNEY 
  GENERAL MERRICK B. GARLAND TO TRANSMIT, RESPECTIVELY, A COPY OF THE 
 AFFIDAVIT TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES RELATED TO THE RAID ON THE 
                            FORMER PRESIDENT

                                _______
                                

 September 22, 2022.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Nadler, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the 
                               following

                             ADVERSE REPORT

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                      [To accompany H. Res. 1325]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the 
resolution (H. Res. 1325) of inquiry requesting the President 
and directing Attorney General Merrick B. Garland to transmit, 
respectively, a copy of the affidavit to the House of 
Representatives related to the raid on the former President, 
having considered the same, reports unfavorably thereon with 
amendments and recommends that the resolution as amended not be 
agreed to.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     2
Background and Need for the Legislation..........................     2
Hearings.........................................................     5
Committee Consideration..........................................     5
Committee Votes..................................................     5
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     7
Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects..........................     7
New Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost 
  Estimate.......................................................     7
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................     7
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................     7
Advisory on Earmarks.............................................     7
Section-by-Section Analysis......................................     7
Minority Views...................................................     7

    The amendments are as follows:
  Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the 
following:

That President Joseph R. Biden is requested, and the Attorney General 
Merrick B. Garland is directed, to transmit to the House of 
Representatives, not later than 14 days after the date of adoption of 
this resolution, a copy of the affidavit submitted for the warrant on 
former President Donald J. Trump to the extent that any such affidavit 
is within the possession of the President or the Department of Justice, 
respectively.

    Amend the title so as to read: Resolution of inquiry 
requesting President Joseph R. Biden and directing Attorney 
General Merrick B. Garland to transmit a copy of the affidavit 
to the House of Representatives related to the raid on former 
President Donald J. Trump.

                          Purpose and Summary

    H. Res. 1325 is a non-binding resolution of inquiry that 
requests President Joe Biden and directs Attorney General 
Merrick Garland to transmit to the House of Representatives a 
copy of the affidavit related to the raid on former President 
Donald J. Trump.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

    Resolutions of inquiry, if properly drafted, are given 
privileged parliamentary status in the House. This means that, 
under certain circumstances, a resolution of inquiry can be 
considered on the House floor even if the committee to which it 
was referred has not ordered the resolution reported and the 
majority party's leadership has not scheduled it for 
consideration. Clause 7 of House rule XIII requires the 
committee to which the resolution is referred to act on the 
resolution within 14 legislative days, or a motion to discharge 
the committee from consideration is considered privileged on 
the floor of the House. In calculating the days available for 
committee consideration, the day of introduction and the day of 
discharge are not counted.\1\ The 117th Congress operated under 
temporary procedures ``that effectively `turned off' the 14-day 
deadline'' for resolutions of inquiry until July 19, 2022.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Wm. Holmes Brown, et al., House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, 
Precedents, and Procedures of the House ch. 49, Sec. 6, p. 834 (2011).
    \2\Christopher M. Davis, Resolutions of Inquiry in the House, Cong. 
Rsch. Serv. 1 (Jul. 21, 2022), https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/
pdf/IN/IN10661/4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under the Rules and precedents of the House, a resolution 
of inquiry is a means by which the House requests information 
from the President of the United States or the head of one of 
the executive departments. According to Deschler's Precedents, 
it is a ``simple resolution making a direct request or demand 
of the President or the head of an executive department to 
furnish the House of Representatives with specific factual 
information in the possession of the executive branch.''\3\ 
Such resolutions must ask for facts, documents, or specific 
information; they may not be used to request an opinion or 
require an investigation.\4\ Resolutions of inquiry are not 
akin to subpoenas; they have no legal force and thus compliance 
by the Executive Branch with the House's request for 
information is purely voluntary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\7 Deschler's Precedents of the United States House of 
Representatives, H. Doc. No. 94-661, 94th Cong., 2d Sess., ch. 24, 
Sec. 8.
    \4\A resolution that seeks more than factual information does not 
enjoy privileged status. Brown, supra note 1, at 833-34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    According to a study conducted by the Congressional 
Research Service (CRS), between 1947 and 2017, 313 resolutions 
of inquiry were introduced in the House.\5\ Within this period, 
CRS found that ``two periods in particular, 1971-1975 and 2003-
2006, saw the highest levels of activity on resolutions of 
inquiry'' and that ``the Committees on Armed Services, Foreign 
Affairs, and the Judiciary have received the largest share of 
references.''\6\ CRS further found that ``in recent Congresses, 
such resolutions have overwhelmingly become a tool of the 
minority party in the House.''\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\Christopher M. Davis, Resolutions of Inquiry: An Analysis of 
Their Use in the House, 1947-2017, Cong. Rsch. Serv. R40879, at i (Nov. 
9, 2017), https://sgp.fas.org/crs/secrecy/R40879.pdf.
    \6\Id.
    \7\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A committee has a number of choices after a resolution of 
inquiry is referred to it. It may vote on the resolution up or 
down as introduced or it may amend it, and it may report the 
resolution favorably, unfavorably, or with no recommendation. 
The fact that a committee reports a resolution of inquiry 
adversely does not necessarily mean that the committee opposes 
looking into the matter. In the past, resolutions of inquiry 
have frequently been reported adversely for several reasons. 
The two most common reasons are substantial compliance and 
competing investigations.
    House Resolution 1325 was introduced by Representative Paul 
Gosar (R-AZ) on August 23, 2022. It requests a copy of the 
affidavit submitted for the warrant on former President Trump 
from President Biden and Attorney General Garland no later than 
14 days after the date of adoption of the resolution.
    The affidavit requested by this resolution was already 
released by the Department of Justice (DOJ) on August 26, 2022, 
three days after H. Res. 1325 was introduced. In it, the 
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) stated that it ``is 
conducting a criminal investigation concerning the improper 
removal and storage of classified information in unauthorized 
spaces, as well as the unlawful concealment and removal of 
government records,'' concluding that, ``Probable cause exists 
to believe that evidence, contraband, fruits of crime, or other 
items illegally possessed'' were on the premises of former 
President Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\``Over 180 classified docs removed by National Archives from 
Mar-a-Lago, affidavit says,'' NPR. Aug. 26, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Former President Trump, is alleged to have left office with 
hundreds of classified documents, including some related to 
nuclear weapons programs, files with significantly limited 
access, and information from protected human intelligence 
sources.\9\ The National Archives and Records Administration 
engaged with former President Trump's team beginning in early 
2021 and asked DOJ to investigate in early 2022 after it 
received classified materials, found files that had been torn 
up, and realized that other important documents were 
missing.\10\ Before the FBI search on August 8, 2022, attorneys 
for President Trump claimed in writing that all classified 
documents had been removed from the Mar-a-Lago resort. This 
assertion was disproven after the FBI found over 100 classified 
documents in Donald Trump's offices and personal quarters at 
Mar-a-Lago.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\Devlin Barrett, et al., ``FBI searched Trump's home to look for 
nuclear documents and other items, sources say,'' The Wash. Post. Aug. 
12, 2022.
    \10\Marshall Cohen, et al., ``Timeline: The Justice Department 
criminal inquiry into Trump taking classified documents to Mar-a-
Lago,'' CNN. Sep. 20, 2022.
    \11\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Keeping the classified documents pertaining to the United 
States' national security in an unsecured office at a resort is 
dangerous to our national security. The state secrets Donald 
Trump took from the White House included information from human 
sources--the same individuals who are disappearing at a rapid 
rate for unknown reasons. In 2021, a top-secret CIA memo warned 
about troubling numbers of informants being captured or killed, 
including networks of human intelligence sources in China, 
Iran, and Pakistan.\12\ The precarious state of our national 
intelligence apparatus warrants increased security, which was 
not possible while these documents were stored at the Mar-a-
Lago Resort.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\Julian E. Barnes and Adam Goldman, ``Captured, Killed or 
Compromised: C.I.A. Admits to Losing Dozens of Informants,'' N.Y. 
Times. Oct. 5, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In spite of Donald Trump's multiple alleged violations of 
United States law, refusal to cooperate with DOJ investigators, 
and potential endangerment of American national security, 
conservatives in politics, on social media, and on cable news 
have viciously attacked FBI personnel. Florida Governor Ron 
DeSantis recently called the FBI investigation ``another 
escalation in the weaponization of federal agencies against the 
Regime's political opponents.''\13\ The sponsor of this 
resolution, Congressman Paul Gosar, tweeted, ``Failure is not 
an option. We must destroy the FBI.''\14\ Finally, members of 
the House Judiciary Committee have gone so far as to accuse the 
FBI and DOJ of weaponizing ``their powers against Americans who 
disagree with them politically''\15\ and ``acting as the 
political enforcers of the Democrat Party.''\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantisFL), Twitter (Aug. 8, 2022, 8:43 PM), 
https://twitter.com/RonDeSantisFL/status/
1556803433939755010?s=20&t=J5GO3C2WHo7A_Op9U1RWDg.
    \14\Paul Gosar (@PaulGosar), Twitter (Aug. 8, 2022, 9:57 PM), 
https://twitter.com/RepGosar/status/1556821907726630915.
    \15\Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ), Twitter (Aug. 9, 2022, 10:38 AM), 
https://twitter.com/RepAndyBiggsAZ/status/1557013466694778880.
    \16\Dan Bishop (@RepDanBishop), Twitter (Aug. 8, 2022, 8:51 PM), 
https://twitter.com/RepDanBishop/status/1556805300681940992.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Far right extremists on the internet have made increasingly 
violent threats against federal law enforcement since the FBI 
search of Mar-a-Lago on August 8, 2022. References on social 
media to terms like ``armed rebellion,'' ``revolution,'' ``lock 
and load,'' and ``civil war'' went up 106 percent in the month 
following the Mar-a-Lago search.\17\ These threats have 
included calls to ``take out'' specific FBI personnel and 
threats to the children of FBI agents, among other 
violence.\18\ These threats have also resulted in physical 
attacks. Three days after the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago, a right-
wing extremist Trump supporter attacked the FBI's Cincinnati 
field office with an AR 15-style rifle, and five days after the 
FBI search, armed protesters gathered outside the FBI field 
office in Phoenix, Arizona.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\Elwood Watson, ``Violent threats increase in wake of Mar-A-Lago 
search,'' Midland Daily News. Sep. 7, 2022.
    \18\Jacob Rosen and Nicole Sgagna, ``Online violent extremist 
rhetoric soars after Mar-a-Lago search,'' CBS News. Aug. 12, 2022.
    \19\Joshua Zitser, ``Armed Trump supporters protest outside FBI 
office in Phoenix following Mar-a-Lago raid: reports,'' Business 
Insider. Aug. 14, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Because of these threats and attacks, on August 12th, FBI 
and DHS released a joint bulletin warning of an increase in 
domestic terror threats against the FBI since the search of 
Donald Trump's offices at Mar-a-Lago, including ``an increase 
in violent threats posted on social media against federal 
officials and facilities, including a threat to place a so-
called dirty bomb in front of FBI Headquarters and issuing 
general calls for `civil war' and `armed rebellion.''\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\Olafimihan Oshin, ``FBI, DHS warn of increase in threats to 
federal law enforcement officials after Mar-a-Lago search: reports,'' 
The Hill. Aug. 14, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Judiciary Committee and the House should not needlessly 
request information that is already available to the public. 
Moreover, resolutions of inquiry should not be used to 
undermine ongoing investigations of wrongdoing, even when the 
person being investigated is the former President.

                                Hearings

    The Committee on the Judiciary held no hearings on H. Res. 
1325.

                        Committee Consideration

    On September 21, 2022, the Committee met in open session 
and ordered the resolution, H. Res. 1325 unfavorably reported 
with an amendment by a rollcall vote of 20 to 14, a quorum 
being present.

                            Committee Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of House rule XIII, the 
following rollcall vote occurred during the Committee's 
consideration of H. Res. 1325:
    1. A motion to report H. Res. 1325 unfavorably passed by a 
rollcall vote of 20 to 14. The vote was as follows:


                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of House rule XIII, the 
Committee advises that the findings and recommendations of the 
Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) 
of House rule X, are incorporated in the descriptive portions 
of this report.

                Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects

    Pursuant to clause 3(d) of House rule XIII, the Committee 
adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

   New Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of House rule XIII and section 
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, and pursuant to 
clause 3(c)(3) of House rule XIII and section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has requested 
by not received from the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office a budgetary analysis and a cost estimate of this 
resolution.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of House rule XIII, no provision 
of H. Res. 1325 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the 
federal government known to be duplicative of another federal 
program.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of 
House rule XIII, H. Res. 1325 requests President Joe Biden and 
directs Attorney General Merrick Garland to transmit to the 
House of Representatives a copy of the affidavit related to the 
raid on former President Trump.

                          Advisory on Earmarks

    In accordance with clause 9 of House rule XXI, H. Res. 1325 
does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 
9(f), or 9(g) of rule XXI.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    The following discussion describes the resolution as 
reported by the Committee.
    H. Res. 1325, a non-binding resolution of inquiry, requests 
President Biden and directs Attorney General Garland to 
transmit to the House of Representatives a copy of the 
affidavit related to the raid on former President Trump.

                             Minority Views

    H. Res. 1325 requests that President Biden, and directs 
Attorney General Merrick Garland to, provide a copy of the 
affidavit to the House of Representatives related to the FBI's 
raid of President Trump's private residence. This resolution 
will assist the Committee's oversight of the FBI's 
unprecedented raid of President Trump's residence--a shocking 
escalation of the Biden Administration's weaponization of law-
enforcement resources against its political opponents.
    On August 15, 2022, Committee Republicans wrote Attorney 
General Garland, FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, and White 
House Chief of Staff Ronald Klain requesting documents and 
communications related to the FBI's raid of President Trump's 
residence.\1\ The Department, FBI, and White House have all 
failed to comply with this request to date. During the 
Committee's business meeting to consider H. Res. 1325, Chairman 
Nadler misleadingly argued that ``the affidavit has now been 
made public,''\2\ ignoring that large portions of the publicly 
available affidavit remain heavily redacted. The unredacted 
affidavit is necessary to fully understand the basis for the 
FBI's unprecedented action and to conduct effective oversight 
of the federal law enforcement apparatus. The Committee should 
not have reported H. Res. 1325 unfavorably.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\See Letter from Rep. Jim Jordan et al, Ranking Member, H. Comm. 
on the Judiciary, to Hon. Merrick Garland, Atty Gen., U.S. Dep't of 
Justice (Aug. 15, 2022); Letter from Rep. Jim Jordan et al, Ranking 
Member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Dir. Christopher Wray, Fed. 
Bureau of Investigation (Aug. 15, 2022); and Letter from Rep. Jim 
Jordan et al, Ranking Member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Ronald 
Klain, Chief of Staff, White House (Aug. 15, 2022).
    \2\H. Res. 1238 et al., markup before the S. Comm. on Judiciary, 
117th Cong. (Sept. 14, 2022) (statement of the Hon. Jerrold Nadler, 
Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      THE FBI'S UNPRECEDENTED RAID

    On August 8, 2022, the FBI raided President Trump's Mar-a-
Lago residence in Palm Beach, Florida, purportedly to seize 
government and presidential records.\3\ In the process, the FBI 
seized numerous other materials such as books, magazines, 
newspapers, clothing and gifts, and privileged documents.\4\ 
This unprecedented raid occurred after months of ongoing 
discussions and negotiations between President Trump's 
representatives and the National Archives and Records 
Administration (NARA) about material from his time office.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\Stephanie Pagones et al, FBI raids Trump's Mar-a-Lago: 
`Unprecedented' for agency to execute search warrant against former 
president, Fox News (AUG. 8, 2022); Deepa Shivram, Trump says FBI 
agents searched his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida, NPR (Aug. 8, 2022).
    \4\Sadie Gurman et al, Court Releases Detailed FBI Inventory of 
Material Seized at Trump's Mar-a-Lago, Wall St. J. (Sept. 2, 2022).
    \5\Order, Donald J. Trump v. U.S., No. 22-81294-CIV-CANNON at 2 
(S.D. Fla. Sept. 5, 2022); Motion for Judicial Oversight and Additional 
Relief, In the Matter of the Search of Mar-a-Lago, No. 22-cv-81294-AMC 
(S.D. Fla. Aug. 22, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Biden Department of Justice has provided limited 
justification for this unprecedented action through a heavily 
redacted warrant affidavit and selective leaks to favored media 
outlets.\6\ The affidavit alleged probable cause to suspect 
evidence of violations of three federal crimes relating to 
federal records--misuse of national defense information; 
obstruction of justice by destroying, altering, or falsifying 
records related to a federal probe; and concealing, removing, 
or destroying protected federal documents.\7\ The affidavit 
also alleged probable cause to suspect of evidence of 
obstruction.\8\ However, the unredacted portions of the 
affidavit provide little context for these allegations and are 
wholly insufficient to support for the FBI's unprecedented 
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\See Devlin Barrett, Josh Dawsey, Perry Stein, & Shane Harris, 
FBI searched Trump's home to look for nuclear documents and other 
items, sources say, Wash. Post (Aug. 11, 2022); Maggie Haberman, Jodi 
Kantor, Adam Goldman, & Ben Protess, Trump Had More Than 300 Classified 
Documents at Mar-a-Lago, New York Times (Aug. 22, 2022).
    \7\Affidavit in support of an application under Rule 41 for a 
warrant to search and seize, In the Matter of the Search of: Locations 
Within the Premises to be Searched in Attachment A, p. 7-8 (S.D. Fla.) 
(unsealed Aug. 26, 2022, Sept. 13, 2022); see also 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec.  
793, 2071, and 1519.
    \8\Id.; see also Editorial Board, The Mar-a-Lago Affidavit: Is That 
All There Is?, Wall St. J. (Sept. 12, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Biden Department of Justice has hidden behind a formal 
policy of not commenting on the investigation, while it has 
simultaneously engaged in selective leaks of salacious 
accusations. On August 11, 2022, Attorney General Garland 
addressed the search for the first time, stating, ``I have made 
clear that the Department of Justice will speak through its 
court filings and its work.''\9\ On the same day, however, the 
Washington Post reported that FBI agents were seeking 
``classified documents relating to nuclear weapons,''\10\ 
according to leaks from ``people familiar with the 
investigation.'' The New York Times later reported that 
President Trump ``had more than 300 classified documents at 
Mar-a-Lago,'' according to leaks from ``people briefed on the 
matter.''\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\Press Release, Attorney General Merrick Garland Delivers 
Remarks, U.S. Department of Justice (Aug. 11, 2022).
    \10\Devlin Barrett, Josh Dawsey, Perry Stein, & Shane Harris, FBI 
searched Trump's home to look for nuclear documents and other items, 
sources say, Wash. Post (Aug. 11, 2022).
    \11\Maggie Haberman, Jodi Kantor, Adam Goldman, & Ben Protess, 
Trump Had More Than 300 Classified Documents at Mar-a-Lago, New York 
Times (Aug. 22, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Department's affidavit and subsequent media leaks do 
not explain why a raid was necessary in light of ample evidence 
of cooperation. In January 2022, President Trump transferred 15 
boxes of documents from Mar-a-Lago to NARA.\12\ In February 
2022, NARA issued a public statement noting the cooperation of 
President Trump in the identification and submission of certain 
documents.\13\ In fact, his submission of material was over 
inclusive. According to NARA, this submission included personal 
and post-presidential records, along with presidential 
correspondence and documents with classification markings.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\Id.
    \13\Press Release, Attorney General Merrick Garland Delivers 
Remarks, U.S. Department of Justice (Aug. 11, 2022).
    \14\Id. at 7-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Subsequently, in May 2022, President Trump voluntarily 
accepted service of a grand jury subpoena that sought documents 
bearing classification markings.\15\ Throughout June 2022, the 
Department and President Trump's lawyers engaged in discussions 
about the matter.\16\ On June 3, the FBI visited Mar-a-largo 
and President Trump allowed them to inspect his storage 
room.\17\ President Trump also provided responsive documents 
during the visit.\18\ On June 8, the FBI requested that 
President Trump further secure the storage room, which he 
did.\19\ President Trump also made his staff available for 
voluntarily interviews.\20\ On June 22, the FBI subpoenaed 
surveillance footage from cameras at Mar-a-Largo.\21\ The Trump 
Organization voluntarily accepted the subpoena and provided the 
footage.\22\ On September 13, a federal judge unsealed a some 
more portions of the affidavit--although still largely 
redacted--that showed President Trump had returned even more 
documents to the Department than previously known.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\Id. at 3; see also Motion for Judicial Oversight and Additional 
Relief at 5, In the Matter of the Search of Mar-a-Lago, No. 22-cv-
81294-AMC (S.D. Fla. Aug. 22, 2022).
    \16\See generally, Motion for Judicial Oversight and Additional 
Relief at 5, In the Matter of the Search of Mar-a-Lago, No. 22-cv-
81294-AMC (S.D. Fla. Aug. 22, 2022).
    \17\Id. at 5.
    \18\Id.
    \19\Id. at 6.
    \20\Id.
    \21\Id.
    \22\Id.
    \23\Affidavit in support of an application under Rule 41 for a 
warrant to search and seize, In the Matter of the Search of: Locations 
Within the Premises to be Searched in Attachment A, p. 7-8 (S.D. Fla.) 
(unsealed Aug. 26, 2022, Sept. 13, 2022. (``Since the fifteen boxes 
were provided to [National Archives], documents bearing classifications 
markings, which appear to contain [national defense information] and 
were stored at the premises in an unauthorized location, have been 
produced to the government in response to a grand jury subpoena....'' 
``On July 6, 2022, in response to the subpoena [served on June 24, 
2022], representatives of the Trump Organization provided a hard drive 
to FBI agents.''). Id. at 2, 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Despite this cooperation, Attorney General Garland 
personally approved the decision to escalate the matter by 
seeking a warrant for excessive and unprecedented access to 
President Trump's private residence.\ 24\ FBI agents spent 
approximately nine hours rummaging through President Trump's 
personal belongings.\25\ They collected more than 11,000 
documents, more than 1,600 press articles and printed 
materials, 19 items of clothing or gifts, and 33 books.\26\ 
They also collected about 100 documents with classification 
markings.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\Press Release, Attorney General Merrick Garland Delivers 
Remarks, U.S. Department of Justice (Aug. 11, 2022). During Garland's 
confirmation hearing, he vowed not to weaponize the Justice Department 
to target the Biden Administration's political opponents. Garland 
promised that the Justice Department (``will be under my protection for 
the purpose of preventing any kind of partisan or other improper motive 
in making any kind of investigation or prosecution. That's my vow. 
That's the only reason I'm willing to do this job.''). Jeremy Herb, 
Garland vows at confirmation hearing to keep politics out of DOJ while 
drawing bipartisan praise, CNN (Feb. 22, 2021).
    \25\Motion for Judicial Oversight and Additional Relief, In the 
Matter of the Search of Mar-a-Lago, No. 22-cv-81294-AMC at 8 (S.D. Fla. 
Aug. 22, 2022).
    \26\Samuel Chamberlain and Emily Crane, Detailed inventory of Trump 
Mar-a-Lago FBI raid released, N.Y. Post (Sept. 2, 2022).
    \27\Phillip Bump, Trump's classified Mar-a-Lago documents, 
catalogued, Wash. Post (Sept. 2, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      THE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS ACT

    The FBI's unprecedented raid of President Trump's residence 
bears on the Presidential Records Act (PRA). Congress passed 
the PRA in 1981 at the beginning of President Ronald Reagan's 
first term.\28\ The PRA ``governs the collection and retention 
of records'' that were ``created or received by the President, 
the President's immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the 
Executive Office of the President,'' while conducting 
activities related to ``the constitutional, statutory, or other 
official or ceremonial duties of the President.''\29\ The 
statute considers these records property of the United States, 
not the relevant President.\30\ The PRA does not extend to a 
President's personal records, defined by the statute as 
``purely private or nonpublic'' records which include diaries, 
journals, materials directly related to the President's 
election or election of another individual, and ``materials 
relating to private political associations.''\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\David B. Rivkin Jr. & Lee A. Casey, The Trump warrant had no 
legal basis, Wall St. J. (Aug. 22, 2022).
    \29\See 44 U.S.C. Sec.  2201 (2014); Meghan M. Stuessy, Cong. 
Research Serv., IN12056, Presidential Records Management: Preservation 
and Disposal (2022).
    \30\Id.
    \31\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    During a presidency, the President has the exclusive 
authority over presidential records.\32\ Following a 
presidency, the Archivist gains responsibility for the 
``custody, control, preservation, and access to presidential 
records.''\33\ The PRA gives a former president the right to 
access records from his presidency.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\Meghan M. Stuessy, Cong. Research Serv., IN12056, Presidential 
Records Management: Preservation and Disposal (2022).
    \33\Id.
    \34\44 U.S.C. Sec.  2205(3) (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Former Department of Justice and White House Counsel 
officials David Rivkin and Lee Casey argue that the PRA 
``guarantees a former president continuing access to his 
papers.''\35\ Rivkin and Casey note that the PRA does not 
address how presidential records are to be physically turned 
over to the Archivist ``leaving this matter to be negotiated 
between the archivist and the former president.''\36\ According 
to Rivkin and Casey, when making records available to the 
former president, the PRA does not distinguish between 
classified and unclassified material.\37\ They conclude that 
``the bureau could and should have sought a less intrusive 
judicial remedy than a search warrant--a restraining order 
allowing the materials to be moved to a location with the 
proper storage facilities, but also ensuring Mr. Trump 
continuing access.''\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\ David B. Rivkin Jr. & Lee A. Casey, The Trump warrant had no 
legal basis, Wall St. J. (Aug. 22, 2022).
    \36\Id.
    \37\Id.
    \38\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  THE APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL MASTER

    During the raid, ``privileged and/or potentially privileged 
documents were among the items taken from [President Trump's] 
home.''\39\ President Trump's lawyers subsequently filed a 
motion requesting the appointment of a special master, an 
independent third party often appointed to assist a court in 
complex litigation, to conduct the review to determine which 
documents were privileged. The filing raised Fourth Amendment 
concerns with the search, characterized the warrant as 
``overbroad,'' and requested a special master to ``protect the 
integrity of privileged documents.''\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \39\Motion for Judicial Oversight & Additional Review, In the 
Matter of the Search of Mar-a-Lago, No. 22-cv-81294-AMC (S.D. Fla. Aug. 
22, 2022). Id. at 3.
    \40\Id. at 10, 11, & 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Department argued against the appointment of a special 
master, essentially arguing that the Biden Administration would 
adequately protect President Trump's right to protect 
privileged documents. The Department stated that ``the 
government's filter team has already completed its work of 
segregating any seized materials that are potentially subject 
to attorney-client privilege, and the government's 
investigative team has already reviewed all of the remaining 
materials, including any that are potentially subject to claims 
of executive privilege.''\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \41\United States' Response to Motion for Judicial Oversight & 
Additional Relief, Donald J. Trump v. U.S., No. 22-CV-81294-CANNON at 3 
(S.D. Fla. Aug. 30, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On September 5, Judge Aileen Cannon ordered the appointment 
of a special master.\42\ Judge Cannon requested the Department 
and President Trump's lawyers submit a joint filing with a list 
of proposed candidates.\43\ The order rejected the Department's 
assurances that its Privilege Review Team caught all privileged 
material. Judge Cannon wrote that ``without drawing inferences, 
there is a basis on this record to question how materials 
passed through the screening process, further underscoring the 
importance of procedural safeguards and an additional layer of 
review.''\44\ In addition, Judge Cannon ordered the Department 
to halt the use of all documents seized in the raid.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \42\Order, Donald J. Trump v. U.S., No. 22-81294-CIV-CANNON (S.D. 
Fla. Aug. 27, 2022)
    \43\Id.
    \44\Id. at 15, n. 13.
    \45\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Commenting on the appointment of the Special master, 
Professor Jonathan Turley stated that:

          While it is admittedly less common to use a special 
        master in a criminal case, it is not ``unprecedented'' 
        for a court to conduct in camera reviews of seized 
        material. In this case, the court wants to use a 
        special master to perform that function. Moreover, 
        special masters are commonly appointed in the federal 
        courts in an array of cases where judges need 
        assistance in creating a record for a ruling on 
        motions.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \46\Jonathan Turley, Federal judge orders appointment of special 
master and halts use of seized Mar-a-Lago material by prosecutors, Res 
IPSA Loquitur Blog (Sept. 6, 2022).

    While the Department is prohibited from using the documents 
at this time, the order ``does not halt the criminal 
investigation.''\47\ Professor Turley stated that Judge 
Cannon's ruling ``will not necessarily change the ultimate 
trajectory of the case but it will force critical reviews and 
rulings on issues from attorney-client privilege to executive 
privilege.''\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \47\Id.
    \48\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               CONCLUSION

    Throughout the business meeting, Democrats failed to join 
Republicans in the Committee's constitutional duty to conduct 
oversight of the Executive Branch and obtain access to the 
unredacted affidavit. Rather than receive more facts and 
information about the FBI's unprecedented raid of President 
Trump's former residence, the Democrats wrongly voted to report 
H. Res. 1325 unfavorably to the House of Representatives. We 
strongly disagree with this action.
                                                Jim Jordan,
                                                    Ranking Member.

                                  [all]