And here’s another statement by Jackson in the ruling:
The Court notes at the outset that there is broad language in Armstrong I stating that the PRA accords the President “virtually complete control” over his records during his time in office. 924 F.2d at 290. In particular, the court stated that the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: “[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records ... neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President’s disposal decision.” Id., citing H.R. Rep. No. 95–1487, at 13 (1978), reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. at 5744. Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records.
Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Nat’l Archives & Records Admin., 845 F. Supp. 2d 288, 296-97 (D.D.C. 2012)
The ruling you’re trying to use to validate your position deals with “documentary records,” as opposed to “Presidential Records.” That’s where the distinction lies.
Agency records—materials created by DoD, CIA, NSA, etc,—are defined in the Presidential Records Act as “Presidential Records.”
NARA put out a press statement in the last year, and I don’t have a hard time imagining that they had a team of lawyers that used a metaphorical lice comb on it before they released it. (CAPS emphasis is mine)
“The PRA also requires that all DOCUMENTARY MATERIALS “be categorized as Presidential records or personal records upon their creation or receipt and be filed separately.” 44 U.S.C. 2203(b). THE PRESIDENT DOES NOT HAVE THE DISCRETION TO CATEGORIZE A PRESIDENTAL RECORD AS A PERSONAL RECORD.”
https://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2023/nr23-016
The audio tapes in the Clinton sock drawer (not created by governmental agencies for use by the President for use in constitutionally described duties) were “documentary materials” and as such were required (under the PRA) to be designated either “personal” or “Presidential” when they were created, and yes the ruling you cited gives him sole discretion to do so.
The documents listed in the indictment do not fall into that category. These documents are “agency documents” and according to the PRA are automatically “presidential records.” As we see in NARA’s press statement,
“The President does not have discretion to categorize a Presidential record as a personal record.”
This is why the ruling your citing doesn’t apply to this situation.
I’d like you to consider this: There is absolutely no point to the Presidential Records Act AT ALL if any president can just automatically claim that every piece of paper from his/her administration is a “personal record.”
Think also about this: if your interpretation is correct, and he’s LEGALLY entitled to whatever he walks away with, then his course of action would have been to challenge the subpoena demanding all documents w/ classification markings. If your interpretation is correct, it would have been a slam-dunk case.
We all know he didn’t do that. Why not?