The media’s almost unanimous pronouncements of Donald Trump’s guilt regarding the classified documents case seem to stem from a lack of legal understanding and a significant political bias. Contrary to popular pronouncements, the former president possesses several strong legal defenses, many of which will be presented in pre-trial motions challenging the 37 charges in the Florida grand jury indictment. These motions can be appealed if denied, making Special Counsel Jack Smith’s hope for a swift trial rather unlikely.

The Presidential Records Act: Trump's Primary Defense

Trump’s main defense hinges on the Presidential Records Act (PRA), a law enacted in 1978 granting former presidents exclusive custody and control over presidential papers accumulated during their terms, potentially encompassing classified documents. This directly contradicts claims by individuals like former Attorney General William Barr, who dismissed the PRA’s relevance. A core legal principle states that specific statutes supersede general ones. The PRA, tailored for presidents, arguably overrides the broader Espionage Act of 1917, which forms the basis of most charges against Trump.

Furthermore, newer laws generally take precedence over older ones in cases of conflict. The PRA, passed 61 years after the Espionage Act, strengthens Trump's argument that it is the controlling law. For over a decade, the Department of Justice and the National Archives concurred that the PRA gave former presidents the right to retain any presidential records, without government intervention. This interpretation was upheld in a 2012 court case involving former President Bill Clinton, where a judge affirmed a president’s sole authority over presidential records.

Because the PRA is a civil statute without criminal penalties, the appropriate course of action for Attorney General Merrick Garland would have been a civil lawsuit, not a criminal seizure.

Selective Prosecution and a Questionable Warrant

Trump's defense will likely argue that Garland weaponized the Espionage Act to criminalize actions that are not criminal under the PRA. This, coupled with the FBI’s history of treating similar situations involving Democrats differently, points to potential selective prosecution, violating Trump's due process rights. The defense may also challenge the legality of the search warrant, claiming it was overly broad and violated the Fourth Amendment.

Attorney-Client Privilege Concerns

The defense will also likely challenge the inclusion of testimony from Trump's former lawyer, Evan Corcoran, arguing that it violates attorney-client privilege. They will contend that a client asking their lawyer about legal strategies, even those related to avoiding government demands, is not a crime.

Obstruction of Justice Arguments

The obstruction of justice charges will be challenged based on the argument that if Trump believed he was acting legally under the PRA, he lacked the “corrupt” intent required for an obstruction charge.

Challenges with Classified Evidence and Jury Access

The classified nature of the evidence poses a significant challenge for a public trial. Jurors need to examine the documents, but lack the security clearance. Declassifying them would create a paradoxical situation. The Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) offers procedures for handling such evidence, but it's not without risks.

The media's rush to judgment contrasts sharply with the realities of legal proceedings. Indictments are just one side of the story. The upcoming trial, if it happens, will be where the actual evidence and legal arguments are presented and tested.