Trump DOJ OLC Opinion Says Presidential Records Act Is Unconstitutional and Does Not Bind President
The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, in an opinion authored by AAG T. Elliot Gaiser (a former clerk to Justice Samuel Alito), concluded the Presidential Records Act is unconstitutional and does not bind the president, stating the statute “is not a valid exercise” of Congress’s authority and that President Trump “does not need to comply.” The OLC memo, which the department treats as binding on the executive branch unless and until a court rules otherwise, comes amid renewed scrutiny of Trump’s handling of official records — which he had previously invoked in his first-term classified-documents case that closed after his 2024 election win.
📌 Key Facts
- The DOJ Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued an opinion concluding the Presidential Records Act (PRA) is unconstitutional and does not bind the President.
- The OLC opinion states the PRA "is not a valid exercise of Congress's Article I authority" and "aggrandizes the legislative branch" at the expense of the executive.
- Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser, head of OLC, is identified as the author of the opinion; the report notes he clerked for Justice Samuel Alito.
- OLC concluded President Trump "does not need to comply" with the PRA and instructed the executive branch to treat the statute as unconstitutional.
- OLC opinions are binding on the executive branch unless and until a court rules otherwise.
- Background: Trump’s first-term classified-documents criminal case ended after he won a second term in November, and he had repeatedly invoked the PRA in that case.
📊 Relevant Data
The Congressional committees investigating the Iran-Contra affair in 1987 relied on presidential records preserved under the Presidential Records Act, and their report recommended reviewing the PRA to make it more effective in ensuring document preservation.
Excerpts of the Report of Congressional Committees Investigating the Iran-Contra Affair — The American Presidency Project
The House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack obtained and used presidential records from the Trump administration, archived under the Presidential Records Act, to investigate the events surrounding the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack.
The Mixed Legacy of the January 6 Investigation for Executive Privilege and Congressional Oversight — Constitutional Commentary
During the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, congressional committees accessed presidential records from the Trump White House under the framework of the Presidential Records Act to examine communications and actions related to the matter.
Modern History of Disclosure of Presidential Records: On the Boundaries of Executive Privilege — Just Security
📰 Source Timeline (2)
Follow how coverage of this story developed over time
- Identifies Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser, head of the Office of Legal Counsel, as the author of the opinion and notes he clerked for Justice Samuel Alito.
- Quotes directly from the OLC opinion that the Presidential Records Act 'is not a valid exercise of Congress's Article I authority' and 'aggrandizes the legislative branch' at the expense of the executive.
- Specifies that OLC has concluded President Trump 'does not need to comply' with the Presidential Records Act, effectively telling the executive branch to treat the statute as unconstitutional.
- Reiterates that OLC opinions are binding on the executive branch unless and until a court rules otherwise.
- Provides background that Trump’s first-term classified documents criminal case ended after he won a second term in November, and explains that he had repeatedly invoked the PRA in that case.