Trump special master ruling ‘troubling,’ legal experts say

A federal judge’s ruling granting former President Trump’s request for a special master has generated a range of intense reactions from legal experts, who have called it unusual, lacking in legal reasoning, “absurd” and offering undue favoritism to a former president.

The ruling in favor of Trump by federal district court Judge Aileen Cannon has been a head-scratcher for many attorneys, who say the court left behind many unanswered questions while also blocking an unprecedented investigation of a former president.

“It does seem to reflect a fair amount of bending and stretching of the law in numerous different respects,” said Jeff Robbins, a former federal prosecutor and congressional investigative counsel.

Cannon surprised observers by indicating last month before she had heard any arguments in the case that she was inclined to grant Trump’s request.

It’s a detail that has gotten renewed attention, as experts say the ruling fails to deliver meeting the legal tests lawyers are trained to analyze while asking the special master to resolve major legal questions as Trump argues executive privilege should allow him to withhold executive branch documents from the current administration.