Questionable special master review

On Aug. 8, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) executed a legally obtained search warrant. The FBI executed this warrant at Mar-a-Lago in Florida seizing 36 items of evidence. These included boxes and containers holding more than 100 classified records. These records are property of the United States of America and belonged in the custody of the National Archives Records Administration.

Among the seized items are documents so sensitive that even the FBI counterintelligence personnel and Department of Justice attorneys require additional clearances before they are permitted to review them.

On Sept. 5, and in spite of the gravity of finding classified documents belonging to the U.S. on the premises of a private citizen, a Trump appointed federal district judge ordered that a special master should review the documents seized by the FBI for possible violation of executive privilege and attorney client privilege. She also halted the Justice Department's own use of the classified records for investigative purposes.

The sheer volume of criticism concerning the judge's action is remarkable as is the ideological range of voices expressing it. Among the critics are liberal Harvard constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe and Trump's former Attorney General William P. Barr.

Long ago when I was in law school, we jokingly said the most powerful legal writ was the Habeas Fixus. Although it may be done with the very best of intentions, the action by the judge in this case has all the appearances of a situation where the fix is in.

JOHN PIEPHO, Cape Girardeau