Is a Special Master Needed to Review Documents Seized from Mar-a-Lago?

A Florida judge showed willingness over the weekend to grant former President Donald Trump's request to have a "special master" review the documents seized from Mar-a-Lago by the FBI. The Justice Department responded by saying it had already completed a similar review.

In a ruling issued Saturday, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon said it was her “preliminary intent” to appoint a special master in the case. Trump's legal team requested that a special master, which is typically a third-party attorney, review the seized documents and filter out any that were protected by executive privilege or attorney-client privilege. On Monday, a DOJ court filing said the department's own "Privilege Review Team" had "identified a limited set of materials that potentially contain attorney-client privileged information, completed its review of those materials, and is in the process of following the procedures" detailed in the search warrant for handling potential privilege disputes.

The news was covered by sources across the political spectrum. Some reports from left-rated sources, such as Washington Post and USA TODAY (Lean Left bias), framed the DOJ's filing as evidence that Trump's special master request was unnecessary by suggesting that the DOJ's review may have served the same purpose. Some coverage from right-rated outlets painted the DOJ as biased against Trump; the Post Millennial wrote that the DOJ's filing "sets the stage for Merrick Garland's Justice Department to argue" that the special master's review is unneeded.