2026年4月7日 / 美国东部时间下午12:40 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
华盛顿——两家组织于周一提起诉讼,挑战司法部认定一项要求保存特定总统记录的联邦法律违宪的裁决。
这场诉讼由世界最大历史学家会员组织美国历史协会和非营利政府监督组织美国监督小组在华盛顿特区联邦法院提起。
这场法律纠纷涉及司法部法律意见办公室出具的一份备忘录意见,该意见认定《总统记录法》违宪。司法部表示,基于其对该法律合宪性的裁决,特朗普总统无需遵守该法。
“本案关乎记录我们国家历史的档案保存,以及美国民众是否能够获取并了解这段历史,”这两家非营利组织在起诉书中写道。“但本案的利害关系甚至更为重大。行政部门宣称有权推翻美国最高法院的法律裁决,以推翻国会通过的、旨在保存并让公众获取总统官方活动记录的法律。”
这两家组织请求法院判令维护《总统记录法》,并要求特朗普先生和白宫高级官员履行该法律规定的职责。美国地区法官贝里尔·豪厄尔已被指派审理此案。
《总统记录法》
《总统记录法》于1978年水门事件后颁布。该法规定总统记录属于美国政府,而非总统个人所有,必须予以保存。该法律要求在总统任期结束时,将特定白宫档案移交给国家档案和记录管理局。
该法案管辖总统、副总统以及总统行政办公室某些部门的档案,例如国家安全委员会。它规定了总统任期内及卸任后信息的保存、获取和保管要求。
该法律已实施四十余年。但上周,领导法律意见办公室的助理司法部长T.埃利奥特·盖泽尔在一份意见书中写道,《总统记录法》“超越了国会列举的和默示的权力,它以牺牲行政部门的宪法独立性和自主权为代价,扩大了立法部门的权力”。他写道,该法规“没有可识别的合法立法目的”。
盖泽尔写道,该法律并非对国会权力的合法行使,且侵犯了总统的独立性和自主权。法律意见办公室的意见对行政部门具有约束力,但如果法院对法律问题作出不同解释,法院的裁决将具有最终效力。
在诉讼中,美国历史协会和美国监督小组辩称,司法部的决定违反了权力分立原则,且无视最高法院先例——最高法院曾在涉及总统档案保存的类似法律案件中,裁定前总统理查德·尼克松败诉。
这两家组织表示,自《总统记录法》生效45年来,没有任何一届政府质疑过其合宪性,或声称该法律不当干预了总统履行宪法规定职责的能力。诉讼书指出,在特朗普的第一届政府期间,白宫法律顾问办公室曾提醒工作人员履行法律规定的档案保存和维护责任。该组织表示,即使在本届政府中,美国政府也曾表示将努力遵守档案记录法律。
“在本届政府看来,总统和近1000名白宫雇员的官方活动记录——使用纳税人资金、在政府财产上生成、涉及官方政府事务——属于总统个人所有,而非美国民众,”他们在起诉书中写道。“民有、民治、民享的政府绝非如此。”
这两家组织警告称,有“充分理由”相信特朗普先生会在2029年1月任期结束后自行保留总统档案,并指出他在第一届政府于2021年1月结束时,曾扣留大量文件。
特朗普首次离开白宫后,经过数月的交涉,国家档案和记录管理局最终从他位于南佛罗里达州的海湖庄园取回了15箱材料。箱内包含数千份文件,其中部分标注为机密。
特朗普总统声称,《总统记录法》允许他保留这些文件,因为它们属于个人物品。他因被指控不当处理敏感政府档案而面临三十多项指控,但在2024年11月连任后,该案终止。
司法部发言人未立即回应就新诉讼置评的请求。
Lawsuit challenges Justice Department memo that declared presidential records law unconstitutional
April 7, 2026 / 12:40 PM EDT / CBS News
Washington — A pair of organizations filed a lawsuit Monday challenging the Justice Department’s determination that a federal law requiring the preservation of certain presidential records is unconstitutional.
The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., by the American Historical Association, the largest membership association of historians in the world, and American Oversight, a nonprofit government watchdog group.
The legal fight involves a memorandum opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel that declared the Presidential Records Act unconstitutional. The Justice Department said as a result of its determination about the constitutionality of the law, President Trump does not need to comply with it.
“This 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,” the complaint from the two nonprofit groups says. “Yet the stakes of this case are even greater. The Executive Branch has declared the power to override the legal determinations of the U.S. Supreme Court, in order to override the laws passed by Congress to preserve and provide public access to official records of the President’s activities.”
The groups are seeking a court order upholding the Presidential Records Act and requiring Mr. Trump and senior White House officials to comply with their duties under the law. U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell has been assigned to the case.
The Presidential Records Act
The Presidential Records Act was enacted in 1978 in the wake of the Watergate scandal. It established that presidential records belong to the U.S. government, not the president personally, and must be preserved. The law requires certain White House records to be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration at the end of a presidential administration.
The measure governs the records of the president, vice president and certain parts of the Executive Office of the President, like the National Security Council. It sets out the requirements for the maintenance, access and preservation of information during and after a presidency.
The law has been in place for more than four decades. But last week, Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser, who leads the Office of Legal Counsel, wrote in an opinion that the Presidential Records Act “exceeds Congress’s enumerated and implied powers, and it aggrandizes the Legislative Branch at the expense of the constitutional independence and autonomy of the Executive.” The statute, he wrote, “serves no identifiable and valid legislative purpose.”
Gaiser wrote that the law is not a valid exercise of Congress’s authority and intrudes on the president’s independence and autonomy. Opinions from the Office of Legal Counsel bind the executive branch, but if a court reaches a different interpretation of a legal question, that determination prevails.
In their lawsuit, the American Historical Association and American Oversight argue that the Justice Department’s decision violates the separation of powers and defies Supreme Court precedent, which ruled against former President Richard Nixon in upholding a similar law regarding the preservation of presidential papers.
The groups said that since the Presidential Records Act took effect 45 years ago, no administration has questioned its constitutionality or argued it unduly interferes with the president’s ability to discharge his duties under the Constitution. The lawsuit noted that in Mr. Trump’s first administration, the White House Counsel’s Office reminded staff of their responsibility to preserve and maintain records as required by the law. Even in his current administration, the government has also indicated it would work to comply with the records law, the groups said.
“In the Administration’s view, the records of the official activities of the President and nearly 1,000 White House employees — generated using taxpayer funds, on government property, regarding official government business — belong to the President personally, and not to the American people,” they wrote in the complaint. “Government for the people, by the people, and of the people this is not.”
The groups warned that there is “strong reason” to believe Mr. Trump will keep presidential records for himself at the end of his term in January 2029 and pointed to his decision to hold onto a slew of documents when his first administration ended in January 2021.
After Mr. Trump left the White House the first time, the National Archives ultimately collected 15 boxes of material from his South Florida residence, Mar-a-Lago, after months of wrangling. The boxes contained thousands of documents, some of which were marked classified.
The president claimed the Presidential Records Act allowed him to keep the documents because they were personal. He was indicted on more than three dozen charges stemming from his alleged mishandling of sensitive government records, but the case ended after he was elected to a second term in November 2024.
Spokespeople for the Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the new lawsuit.
发表回复