FURIOUS Judge SHREDS Trump White House in EMERGENCY ORDER!!!

Indexed: 2026-05-22

[00:00:00]Donald Trump's declaration that he has the right to destroy records based on a memo prepared by his office of legal counsel has hit a major roadblock. It's always nice to report when a federal judge does exactly what you think they should do to protect the democracy.

[00:00:16]We've got breaking news. a new order by John Bates, a federal judge in the District of Columbia, which preliminarily enjoins and blocks the office of the presidency, including the chief of staff, Susie Wilds, the deputy chief of staff, Steven Miller, everybody that works under the president in his office, including the Council of Economic Adviserss, the National Security Council from destroying records. Right? Can't destroy records anymore. You must preserve them. They are the people's papers under the uh Presidential Records Act of 1978 and Donald Trump's attempt to replaced replace his obligations under the Presidential Records Act established by Congress with just a memo of suggested ways to hold on to your papers by his office of legal counsel written by a guy named David Wearington. the Wearington memo or the records guidance that has been completely debunked by Judge Bates.

[00:01:13]Hold on to your records everybody because because we got a lot to talk about in this lawsuit. I'm Michael Popac. Thanks for being here on Legal AF. Take a minute and hit the free subscribe button. Freedom of the Press Foundation and a number of watchdog groups brought a suit against Donald Trump within days after he had his office of legal counsel, his own lawyers, issue a memo that said that he and the presidency were not subject to the 1978 presidential records act created in the wake of the last criminal president, Donald um Richard Nixon, who who had a nasty little habit of trying to erase uh audio tapes.

[00:01:55]that he had made surreptitiously and destroy records. So there was a big fight over whose records were they.

[00:02:03]Congress put it to rest, declaring effectively the presidential records are federal property because they're the people's papers and then designating that they be directed to the national archive for the national archivist that they sit there for 5 years unless the president on the way out extends that period of time for national security reasons for up to 12 years. So all so that and that was confirmed in a case called Nixon versus the General Services Administration uh back in the in the 19 late 1970s early 1980s in which the Supreme Court said we don't have a separation of powers problem.

[00:02:43]Yes, you're the president and they're Congress, but Congress can direct which part of the executive branch records will sit as federal property. and we're directing they go to the National Archive under this very specific uh detailed statutory scheme. That's what Donald Trump didn't like. Of course, he doesn't like it. He's the guy from Mara Lago, if you'll remember, that took 15 boxes of classified top secret documents, including at the highest level of classification, including nuclear secrets, including war uh plans, and took them with him to Mara Lago, shoved them into his dining room, his bathroom, his his spilling out of closets. Do you remember that was the subject of a uh grand jury subpoena executed at Mara Lago eventually an indictment by a grand jury and he would let's be frank he would have been convicted of espionage and obstruction of justice Donald Trump had Jack Smith been allowed to complete his task and Donald Trump hadn't been reelected president. We all know that.

[00:03:50]So of course this president is the one that said you know what I don't think I need to save any records. I don't think anything's the people's records. I'm taking everything with me. And just as a little bit of wallpaper, he had David Wearington, his office of legal counsel head, write a a records guidance. Well, you shouldn't erase this and maybe you shouldn't erase that and maybe text messages, but it's up to you. And Judge Bates is like, no, it's not up to any of you. I'm going to read to you from his opinion. This is up to the Presidential Records Act. And Trump should know he's in trouble when a federal judge starts off, and this is about a dozen versions of this. A federal judge starts off his order, his memorandum opinion, with a quote. Sometimes it's Shakespeare, sometimes it's a founding father, sometimes it's a framer, sometimes it's the Constitution, sometimes it's Alexander Hamilton. In this case, once again, I think it's like the third time a judge has cited to George Orwell.

[00:04:48]Okay? And here's what he says. the famous writer of 1984, the dystopic futurist. Here's how he starts off his memorandum opinion.

[00:04:59]Who controls the past controls the future? Who controls the present controls the past? George Orwell, 1984, written in 1949. Perhaps with that lesson in mind, Judge Bates continues, "Congress enacted laws to ensure that government records are created, preserved, and made available to the public. Among those is the Presidential Records Act, which mandates the preservation of materials related to the official responsibilities of the president. In doing so, the act democratizes the history of an indispensable institution. Access to those records allows future presidents to pick up where their predecessors left off. Congress to identify inefficiency and misfeasants and the public to learn from the mistakes of the past. Now almost 50 years after its passage, the executive branch asserts that the records act is unconstitutional and and Judge Bates responds in his introduction.

[00:05:59]Page two, on the merits, the records act is likely constitutional. It was validly enacted by Congress under the property clause because Congress may prospectively designate presidential records as federal property and then of course Congress has the right to regulate that property. And it is also a valid exercise of the necessary and proper clause of the constitution in article one as it promotes the accountability and efficiency of executive branch operations. Moreover, it does not impermiss impermissibly intrude on any presidential prerogative, especially because presidents, including Trump in his first term, have complied without complaint for almost 50 years. I mean, he's being nice there. I would have dropped a footnote and stay except for the 15 boxes he stole and took with him to um Mara Lago. He ends his introduction this way. The Records Act follows in a tradition dating back to the founding of laws promoting integrity in public service. That's novel. When we talk about the democracy, doesn't the democracy demand integrity in public service? It is not the first and it will not be the last. to adopt the government's position that the act is unconstitutional would disable Congress and future presidents from reflecting on experience in defiance of the very words engraved on the National Archives building in Washington. Right? It's if you go and I've been to the National Archives building has some amazing founding documents there you want to go visit. And above the door it says, "What is passed is prologue from William Shakespeare The Tempest Act 2, scene one." And while the presidency is a singularly important institution, that gravity does not free it from modest constraint. Quite the opposite, each branch of government derives its authority from the trust placed in it by the people, capital P. And Congress has vowedly determined that this act helps to maintain that trust by shining some light on the activities of the president and his aids. Which then led after an analysis of of uh all the records act and presidential records act, Congress's struggle with Nixon and the Nixon presidency, uh the lawsuits and the Supreme Court case about it. After all of that analysis, here's his order, a separate document which applies to Susie Wilds. Susie, stop. put down the shredder. Stephen Miller to Donald Trump also and the people that run that run around with him. And by the way, special side note to uh uh to Natalie Sharp who's the uh who's been identified as the presidential or the Donald Trump uh human printer who does all of his social media posts. Save them all because they're all presidential records.

[00:08:48]Here's the order. The U preliminary injunction is granted. He's not going to stay this for an appeal. If Donald Trump's going to appeal this, which he has, he's he's gonna have to ask them for an appeal. Uh ask the appellet court for an appeal. defendants. The executive office of the president, the White House office, the office of the vice president and the chief of staff to the president, Susie Wilds are preliminarily enjoined effective actually uh in 4 days, May 26th, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. That gives them a little bit of time to do their appeal.

[00:09:23]To comply in full with the provisions of the Presidential Records Act, to preserve and not destroy or delete presidential and and vice presidential records as defined in the act.

[00:09:35]Ensure that the covered employees um not create or send any presidential or vice presidential record using nonofficial electronic message accounts.

[00:09:47]Yeah, we're talking to you, White House.

[00:09:49]Don't use Signal, WhatsApp, or other text or instant messaging applications or platforms unless they copy an official electronic messaging account, which creates a record. We don't want any more disappearing files, if you know what I mean. Uh, defendant shall transmit a copy of this uh so that it applies by May 26th at 9:00 a.m. and shall file a notice with the court by May 28 how they've complied with the order. Now, Trump can go off and do his appeal, try to get his stay. Here's my prediction. I don't think depending upon the appellet panel, if it's not two Trump appointees, if it's not like Judge Rayo uh and uh and Judge Walker or something like that, if it's a normal panel, they're not going to continue. They're not going to block the stay. They're going to continue to have records preserved throughout the appeal because once destroyed, you can't really bring them back now, can you? And we'll follow it right here um as we lead into Memorial Day weekend on Legal AF. What a great time to celebrate uh and to commemorate those those fallen soldiers and valor and those in in support of our nation's uh founding and all of our wars, our veterans. We salute them here.

[00:11:10]They're doing they're doing uh you know a difficult task to to defend the democracy in their way with blood and treasure being expended and we appreciate them and uh come over to Legal AF Substack for the uh rest of the month. I'm running a 40% off sale in order to encourage you to become part of our community. So until my next report, I'm Michael Pop. Can't get your fill of legal AF? Me neither. That's why we formed the legal AF Substack. Every time we mention something in a hottake, whether it's a court filing or a oral argument, come over to the Substack.

[00:11:46]You'll find the court filing and the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do called, wait for it, Morning AF. What else? All the other contributors from Legal AF are there as well. We got some new reporting. We got interviews. We got ad free versions of the podcast and hot takes where legal AF on Substack. Come over now to free subscribe.