Special counsel Jack Smith arrives to speak about an indictment of former President Donald Trump, Aug. 1, 2023, at a Department of Justice office in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File)
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is once again asking a federal court to issue an emergency order directing the U.S. Department of Justice to preserve all of the records and documents in connection with special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into President-elect Donald Trump. Paxton’s latest request comes after he claimed that a “paper shredding truck” was parked in front of the DOJ headquarters.
Paxton filed the reply motion seeking a preservation or temporary restraining order Thursday in the Amarillo Division of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
“Plaintiffs request a preservation order because, in light of Defendants’ past conduct it is a necessary, and modest, enforceable safeguard to ensure that Defendants comply with their legal obligations and avoid subjecting Plaintiffs to irreparable harm,” the filing states. “Importantly, this case is not just a relitigation of the past — Defendants are acting in multiple ways right now that raise a serious risk of document destruction. Just days ago, widely shared photos showed a paper shredding truck parked outside DOJ headquarters.”
As Law&Crime previously reported, Paxton initially made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for a swath of documents and communications concerning the special counsel’s investigations into Trump’s activities. He followed that request by filing a motion asking the court to prohibit Smith and his team from destroying records to “avoid accountability.”
The DOJ responded to Paxton’s initial filings by stating that the department “is committed to preserving its records and following the law.”
But Paxton, a staunch Trump supporter, has long derided the investigations and subsequent prosecutions of the president-elect as being politically motivated. He claims that the Justice Department has a history of “mishandling critical records” and accuses the department of being “evasive” regarding his records request.
“This Court has the authority to protect public trust by ensuring transparency,” Thursday’s filing states. “Jack Smith’s investigation was a political and legal abomination; the public must be able to learn what actually happened. And Jack Smith’s team must not be permitted to avoid accountability. Plaintiffs seek only a modest and practical safeguard: a preservation order that ensures critical records remain intact. This measure imposes no meaningful burden on Defendants but prevents irreparable harm to Plaintiffs and the public.”
In his initial filing, Paxton baselessly asserted that the court’s intervention was required because the investigations themselves were unlawful, as were the actions of investigators involved in the probes. He alleged that without a court order, the DOJ would “simply destroy the records” he had requested, saying that Smith’s team had “conducted itself in multiple ways that suggest it cannot be blindly trusted to preserve, and eventually produce, all of its records.”
Smith earlier this month formally began winding down the federal criminal investigations against Trump due to the DOJ’s long-standing policy against prosecuting a sitting president.
Paxton himself is no stranger to FOIA controversy. The nonpartisan government watchdog group American Oversight has been seeking emails Paxton sent around the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection and communications with gun industry lobbyists following the mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, for years. A Texas appellate court earlier this year ruled in favor of the watchdog group after it said the requests were stonewalled. That case remains ongoing.
Paxton’s legal filings come after Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, also sent Smith a letter stating the committee was “concerned” that the special counsel’s office “may attempt to purge” records relevant to the committee’s request for information and documents.
“You should construe this preservation notice as an instruction to take all reasonable steps to prevent the destruction or alteration, whether intentionally or negligently, of all documents, communications, and other information, including electronic information and metadata, that are or may be responsive to this congressional inquiry,” Jordan wrote.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
