Trump DOJ executive privilege memo
Archived — this story has rotated out of today’s deck. It is kept here in full.
The gist
Trump's DOJ issued a memo shielding private advisers' communications from subpoenas via executive privilege.
Critics fear it blocks accountability and Congress oversight, with courts yet to rule.
Background
The memo from the Office of Legal Counsel argues that executive privilege extends to private advisers outside the executive branch, protecting their communications with the president from subpoenas. This comes amid Trump's broad use of executive privilege and legal battles, including a BBC subpoena for Ivanka Trump and Trump Jr., and a lawsuit over law firm orders. Critics, including Senator Adam Schiff, see it as a partisan move to shield the president from congressional oversight, especially if Republicans lose midterm elections.
How it unfolded
- Aug 11, 2026Senator Adam Schiff issues a statement criticizing the memo as a partisan measure to insulate the president from congressional subpoenas.
- Aug 18, 2026The Trump administration argues in court that the names of advisers who drafted executive orders targeting law firms are shielded by executive privilege.
- Aug 22, 2026The DOJ memo is reported as the basis for blocking the BBC's subpoena of Ivanka Trump and Trump Jr., claiming their communications are privileged.
- Aug 25, 2026The Guardian publishes an opinion piece criticizing the memo's expansion of executive privilege and its lack of candor about historical precedent.
Who’s saying what
- Critics
- Senator Adam Schiff says the memo is a partisan measure to insulate the president from congressional subpoenas when the majority flips.
- Scholars
- Law professor Jonathan Shaub says the privilege is designed to protect substance, not just names of participants, and the administration's claim is expansive.
- Administration
- White House lawyer Gary Lawkowski argues that communications identifying people involved in drafting orders are shielded under presidential privilege.
Still unverified
The memo's historical claims about Jefferson's 1807 subpoena are disputed by critics, who say it lacks candor.