Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
President Donald Trump's tweets are official government statements, Justice Department lawyers told a federal judge last month.
The question of whether Trump's tweets count as official statements is one that's been on the minds of lawyers and legal scholars since the tweet-happy president took office. In a lawsuit pending in federal court in New York alleging Trump illegally blocks people on Twitter, the government has maintained Trump uses Twitter as a private platform. But in a filing on November 13 in federal court in Washington, DC, DOJ lawyers wrote that Trump's tweets are “official statements of the president of the United States.”
The brief was filed in a freedom of information lawsuit brought by Politico reporter Josh Gerstein and the James Madison Project against the DOJ, CIA, the Office of Director of National Intelligence and the Defense Department. In a Nov. 2 hearing, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta of the District of Columbia asked DOJ lawyers to provide insight on how the government views the president's tweets, and “how official they are.”
Gerstein's lawsuit relates to the so-called “Steele dossier” on Trump published by Buzzfeed News in January. The dossier contained various salacious claims about the president, and CNN reported in January that Trump was briefed on the dossier by intelligence officials and given a two-page “synopsis.” Gerstein's suit seeks the disclosure of that synopsis as well as any determinations by the government on its accuracy.
In response to Gerstein's request, the defendant agencies have given so-called “Glomar” responses, neither confirming nor denying existence of responsive records. Gerstein pointed to various public statements including tweets in which the president referred to the dossier as “discredited” as official statements acknowledging the allegations in the dossier were “vetted.”
Though the government said the tweets are official statements, the brief said the “court cannot assume that the president was expressing a view based on 'some knowledge and understanding' provided by these agencies.” The DOJ lawyers also wrote that though the plaintiffs expressed “dismay” that Trump hasn't explained the basis for his tweets, they “are not entitled to clarification of what the president has chosen to say.”
*****
Cogan Schneier is a Washington, DC-based litigation reporter covering DC courts, national litigation trends, the Justice Department and the federal judiciary for ALM.
President Donald Trump's tweets are official government statements, Justice Department lawyers told a federal judge last month.
The question of whether Trump's tweets count as official statements is one that's been on the minds of lawyers and legal scholars since the tweet-happy president took office. In a lawsuit pending in federal court in
The brief was filed in a freedom of information lawsuit brought by Politico reporter Josh Gerstein and the James Madison Project against the DOJ, CIA, the Office of Director of National Intelligence and the Defense Department. In a Nov. 2 hearing, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta of the District of Columbia asked DOJ lawyers to provide insight on how the government views the president's tweets, and “how official they are.”
Gerstein's lawsuit relates to the so-called “Steele dossier” on Trump published by Buzzfeed News in January. The dossier contained various salacious claims about the president, and CNN reported in January that Trump was briefed on the dossier by intelligence officials and given a two-page “synopsis.” Gerstein's suit seeks the disclosure of that synopsis as well as any determinations by the government on its accuracy.
In response to Gerstein's request, the defendant agencies have given so-called “Glomar” responses, neither confirming nor denying existence of responsive records. Gerstein pointed to various public statements including tweets in which the president referred to the dossier as “discredited” as official statements acknowledging the allegations in the dossier were “vetted.”
Though the government said the tweets are official statements, the brief said the “court cannot assume that the president was expressing a view based on 'some knowledge and understanding' provided by these agencies.” The DOJ lawyers also wrote that though the plaintiffs expressed “dismay” that Trump hasn't explained the basis for his tweets, they “are not entitled to clarification of what the president has chosen to say.”
*****
Cogan Schneier is a Washington, DC-based litigation reporter covering DC courts, national litigation trends, the Justice Department and the federal judiciary for ALM.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.