Judge Amy gets another headache

In a two-page notice, DOJ said that administration officials on Wednesday had "instructed relevant personnel" to preserve six categories of records while a lawsuit over how the White House handles records of Trump's and other senior officials' communications with foreign officials goes forward. The groups originally sued in May, but this week asked the judge to enter an emergency order requiring the administration to preserve documents in light of new information about Trump's conversations with foreign leaders and reports of efforts by the White House to restrict access to those records.

A DOJ lawyer had declined to immediately give that assurance at a court hearing on Tuesday, arguing the Justice Department had already instructed administration officials to preserve records relevant to the lawsuit, and there was no evidence of any risk of document destruction. US District Judge Amy Berman Jackson expressed confusion about why the government couldn't take the extra step of confirming it would preserve certain categories of information for now and avoid forcing her to make a swift decision on potentially complex legal questions.

Those categories of documents that the administration committed to preserving include all records of the president's meetings, calls, and other communications with foreign leaders, documents about the administration's record-keeping practices and policies, and records about any efforts by the White House or other executive branch officials to "claw back" or otherwise limit access to records about officials' communications with foreign leaders.

Jackson on Tuesday had strongly encouraged the Justice Department to consider making a voluntary assurance that the government would preserve documents to maintain the "status quo," as opposed to have the court officially weigh in on the plaintiffs' request for an emergency temporary restraining order.

[...]

As part of its argument for having the case tossed out, the Justice Department contends the court lacks authority to hear the case at all. During Tuesday's hearing, DOJ lawyer Kathryn Wyer expressed concern that giving a voluntary assurance to preserve records at this stage could be interpreted as a concession by the government. The government also took the position that in asking for assurances that documents would be preserved while the case proceeds, the plaintiffs were trying to get information about privileged legal advice. Jackson said she didn't understand the government's position, since the plaintiffs weren't asking to see any of the documents, or for specific information about what documents existed.

[...]

"Defendants voluntarily agree, solely in the interest of acceding to the Court’s request to moot Plaintiffs’ Motion, to preserve the material at issue," Wyer wrote.

  Buaafeed News

Who's going to know whether they do it or not?

You'd think there'd be some attorneys in the justice department who had the integrity to quit and go into private practice.  But maybe they've all been weeded out.  And maybe some of them are just testing themselves to see if they are cut out for criminal defense work.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE: