According to a court filing from his legal team on Wednesday, former President Donald Trump is accusing the House select committee investigating January 6 of being so relentless in search of his White House documents that it might permanently harm the presidency.
Trump is appealing a lower court's order that his documents must be given over to the committee.
The Biden administration and the United States House of Representatives is united in their opposition to the previous President's attempts to keep the documents secret.
On November 30, an appeals court will hear oral arguments in the case.
"The Appellees' clear disdain for President Trump is leading them to a course of action that will result in permanent damage to the institution of the presidency," lawyers for Trump wrote in their reply brief to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday.
"A current president cannot destroy the confidentiality of Executive Branch communications and the important reliance interests attached to that confidentiality for his political advantage to the detriment of his predecessors and successors," they continued.
According to Trump, since the Biden administration chose to invoke executive privilege over the papers, future presidents may opt to disregard secrecy in the White House if their predecessors are from a different political party than they are from.
The Biden administration has argued that, under the National Archives' approach to historical records, all of the documents Trump is attempting to keep secret will eventually be made public, and that, even if some documents are privileged, the White House believes there is a great need for transparency when it comes to January 6.
Trump, who is now defending his case before the appeals court above her, claims that he should win the lawsuit and prevent the House committee from proceeding as constitutional protection and as a measure to preserve the President's executive privilege.
He also wants the court to review the records from his presidency page by page to decide what should be protected, a request that would probably cause the document production to take many months or possibly years because of the lengthy review process.
The three-judge appeal panel that will hear the case has already expressed reservations about the strategy used in the case.
Following the receipt of the first batch of written legal papers in the case, the judges asked the lawyers engaged on Tuesday whether they could address the issue of whether the court has the authority to intervene in the disagreement during their oral arguments on Wednesday.
What do you think? Leave a comment with your opinion, and if you feel this is important, please share this article on social media with your friends and family.