(08-18-2022, 10:09 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote:

(08-18-2022, 09:16 PM)mikesez Wrote: The President does not get to redefine terms that are defined in a statute.

The Court already said you're wrong, so feel free to spin however you like.

Yes, that's exactly what the federal judge wrote in 2012.  "The user Mikesez on the Jacksonville Jaguars Forum is wrong".
Seriously though, I'm not going to waste any time reading the filings and the decision, but we can be sure the facts of the case were different.  The quoted parts of the decision are probably what judges call "dicta" as well.
All that said, perhaps all of the seized documents really do qualify as personal records. But that's for a judge to decide, based on the definition in the statute. The President is allowed to give the national archives or any other person some of his personal records if he wants. But he is not free to claim as personal records documents which do not meet the statuatory definition of personal records. It's a one-way street.

---