The search warrant receipt did not provide any further detail about the substance of the classified documents.
Federal agents also took away four sets of top secret documents, three sets of secret documents, and three sets of confidential documents, the receipt showed. The most sensitive set of documents removed from Trump’s post-presidency home in Florida were listed generically as “Various Classified/TS/SCI” – the abbreviation for top secret/sensitive compartmented information – the warrant shows.įBI agents retrieved a total of 11 sets of classified documents, some of which were marked top secret, the Wall Street Journal first reported. The contents of the search warrant became public days after FBI agents seized 11 boxes worth of materials from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, including records considered so sensitive that they could not be individually listed in the “receipt” of what was removed. They represent perhaps one of the most treacherous legal and political moments faced to date by the former president.Ī conviction for violating any of the detailed laws would be severe: the Espionage Act has a maximum penalty of 10 years in federal prison and the statute for obstruction has a maximum penalty of 20 years, while the statute for destruction of records can also bar anyone convicted from holding future office. The disclosures, which came in an attachment to the search warrant, mark a dramatic escalation in the justice department’s criminal inquiries into Trump. The inclusion of the obstruction statute could be an indication that the justice department is investigating Trump not just over the potentially unlawful retention of records, but also whether he attempted to impede a separate, or wider, criminal inquiry. The other statutes listed on the warrant include the federal law that makes it a crime to destroy or conceal a document in order to obstruct a government investigation, and the federal law that prohibits the unlawful removal of government documents more generally.
ESPIONAGE ACT PENALTIES FULL
Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.Most notably, the search warrant authorized FBI agents to seize materials from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence to investigate crimes in connection with the Espionage Act, which outlaws the unauthorized retention of national security information that could harm the United States or aid an adversary. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. Copyright of Southern Law Journal is the property of SALSB (dba Southern Academy of Legal Studies in Business) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.Therefore, this article reviews the penalties available under the EEA and surveys the actual penalties assessed in those cases disposed through sentencing from 1996 through 2017.
For business owners weighing the benefits and risks of pursuing criminal versus civil action, this information can be quite useful.
Although the EEA provides substantial maximum penalties against those charged with trade secret theft, the actual penalties assessed are much lower. Abstract: Business owners interested in pursuing criminal charges against a trade secret thief under the federal Economic Espionage Act (EEA) might want to think twice.1 Not only must the business owner be concerned that the government might not take the case, 2 but even if the government does take the case, the punishment is not significant.
0 kommentar(er)
