Historians Sue Trump After DOJ Declares Presidential Records Act "Unconstitutional"

Trump Administration Claims It Can Destroy Presidential Records

The American Historical Association and government watchdog American Oversight filed a federal lawsuit on April 6 seeking to force the Trump administration to comply with the Presidential Records Act -- a law enacted after Watergate to prevent presidents from destroying or hoarding official records.

The lawsuit targets an April 1 memo from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel declaring the 45-year-old law unconstitutional. T. Elliot Gaiser, a Trump appointee serving as assistant attorney general, wrote that the act intrudes on the "independence and autonomy of the President."

Translation: Trump's DOJ believes the president should be free to destroy records of his official conduct or take them for personal use.

"As of this moment, the Administration believes that the President is legally free to destroy records of his official government conduct, or even spirit away the records for his own future personal use," the lawsuit states.

The Presidential Records Act was established in the wake of Richard Nixon's attempt to destroy the White House tapes that proved his role in covering up the Watergate burglary. Since then, federal law has required all presidential records to be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration at the end of each term -- ensuring the American public can access and learn from the historical record.

A President With a Track Record of Hoarding Classified Documents

This is not Trump's first clash with federal recordkeeping requirements.

More than 300 classified documents were recovered from Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate over a year after he left the White House. Most were seized under subpoena in June 2022 or during an FBI search in August 2022.

Trump was indicted on 40 criminal counts in 2023 for allegedly keeping classified information and other sensitive presidential records from his first term in violation of federal law. The indictment also alleged Trump obstructed justice by trying to block the government's efforts to retrieve the documents.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon -- a Trump appointee -- dismissed the case in 2024, ruling that the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith was unlawful.

Throughout the case, Trump repeatedly claimed he had the right to take records with him after leaving office, despite the Presidential Records Act explicitly requiring otherwise.

White House Claims "Rigorous Records Retention Program"

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement that "President Trump is committed to preserving records from his historic Administration and he will maintain a rigorous records retention program."

Jackson added that Trump is retaining the current electronic records system, which prevents emails and documents from being deleted, and that all Executive Office staff are required to take records training.

The Justice Department declined to comment on the lawsuit.

Why This Matters

The Presidential Records Act exists for a reason: to prevent presidents from covering their tracks, destroying evidence of wrongdoing, or treating official government records as personal property.

If Trump's Justice Department succeeds in declaring the law unconstitutional, future presidents could destroy records of corruption, policy failures, or criminal conduct without consequence. The American public would lose access to the historical record -- and accountability would become optional.

The American Historical Association, which represents more than 10,000 historians, argues the case is "about the preservation of records that document our nation's history, and whether the American people are able to access and learn from that history."

For a president already caught hoarding classified documents at his private resort, the stakes could not be clearer.