Today, the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed a federal district judge’s appointment of a special master to review documents seized by the FBI in a raid on former President Trump’s Florida residence.
I have this nerdy interest in the U. S. Constitution. As every first-year law student and even the occasional eighth grader studying for the constitution test knows, the federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. Basically, that means that one must provide a reason to be in the court based on the Constitution or some federal law.
Fast forward to my unhealthy habitual CNN watching for hours every evening and then again each morning. One will recall, if he or she habitually watches CNN, that our former president made off with documents and artifacts from his time in the White House and keep them in his Florida home.
The FBI and the National Archives asks for them back. The former president gave some back. They asked for the rest. He stalled. Then he gave some more back. Someone provided a false declaration, a fancy name for an affidavit, that there were no more documents.
Oh, but there were. The FBI raided Mar-a-Lago and seized the documents and is now investigating to find out what secrets were contained in the documents and who might have learned those secrets. That and who can be held criminally liable for illegally possessing secret documents.
A big story on CNN. CNN and its viewers like me, love an FBI raid.
A juicy story with an espionage angle took a turn to the truly exciting world of federal court jurisdiction.
President Trump surprisingly filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida asking the court to appoint a “special master,” a lawyer unrelated to either Trump or the Government, to examine the documents and see if the Government really needs them.
Basically, the target of an investigation asked a court to interfere in the FBI’s investigation of the target’s crimes. Hmmm. Okay then. Can one do that? Therein lies the excitement of this jurisdictional query.
District Judge Aileen Cannon said her federal court “had the power” and appointed the special master who has for month know been looking at documents. I confess I kind of lost track of the story assuming that CNN would alert me if need be.
Today, the Eleventh Circuit reversed the appointment of the special master and dismissed President Trump’s case today for want of jurisdiction. “For want of juridiction.” Can the English language be more elegant? One can read the opinion here: https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202213005.pdf
The jurisdictional lesson, at least in my mind, is that the federal court’s equitable jurisdiction, a court’s inherent right to impose fairness, is limited, very limited and make no exceptions for former presidents. A former president is a citizen like any other, except with lots of security and a nice pension.
I won’t get into the four-part test based on the Richey case so let’s just skip to the end:
“In considering these arguments, we are faced with a choice: apply our usual test; drastically expand the availability of equitable jurisdiction for every subject of a search warrant; or carve out an unprecedented exception in our law for former presidents. We choose the first option. So the case must be dismissed.”
As is the case with most reversals, courts of appeal typically do not openly chastise a district judge, but one phase in part B of the opinion did stand out to me: “The district court was undeterred by this lack of information.”
Ouch. That’s pretty salty language about the Trump appointee.
So there you go. The Eleventh Circuit closes the courthouse door once again. CNN and the jurisdiction of federal courts, my two loves meet again.
I still love photography too. The Chicago Elite Classic starts tomorrow.