llustration: Rebecca Zisser/Axios

Attorneys from the Department of Justice argued in court on Tuesday that President Trump's tweets authorizing the "total declassification of any & all documents" related to the Russia investigation and Hillary Clinton's emails should not be considered real declassification orders.

Why it matters: BuzzFeed News reporter Jason Leopold cited the tweets in an emergency motion last week seeking to gain access to special counsel Robert Mueller's unredacted report as part of a Freedom of Information Act request.

Details: DOJ attorneys told District Judge Reggie Walton, who demanded that the DOJ clarify its standing on the tweets, that they conferred with the White House counsel's office "and were informed that there was no order requiring declassification or disclosure of any document at issue in this case."

  • "The Department was further informed that the President’s statements on Twitter were not self-executing declassification orders and do not require the declassification of any particular documents," the attorneys wrote in a filing.
  • "Although in May 2019, the President did delegate declassification authority to the Attorney General, to date, the Attorney General has not exercised that declassification authority to release any of the redacted material in this case based on the President’s Twitter statements."

The big picture: This is not the first time the DOJ has argued that the president's tweets should not be taken as official directives or "pure fact," according to USA Today.

  • In March 2017, Trump tweeted that former President Barack Obama had his "wires tapped" during the 2016 presidential election. DOJ later confirmed in court that the agency "has no records that support his statement."
  • In November 2017, Trump tweeted that the House of Representatives was refusing to release documents that covered up misconduct by the FBI and the DOJ, and they needed to be released immediately. DOJ attorneys said in a filing that despite Trump's tweets, there were no official disclosure orders.

Read the filing.

Go deeper

10 hours ago - Technology

How the states fit into DOJ's antitrust case against Google

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

When the Justice Department filed its antitrust lawsuit against Google on Tuesday, it did so without the backing of most of the state attorneys general who have also been probing the search giant.

Yes, but: Those states may well swoop in later to expand the case to cover even more competition concerns.

Justice Department sues Google over alleged search monopoly

Illustration: Lazaro Gamio/Axios

The Justice Department and 11 states Tuesday filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google, accusing the company of using anticompetitive tactics to illegally monopolize the online search and search advertising markets.

Why it matters: The long-awaited suit is Washington's first major blow against the tech giants that many on both the right and left argue have grown too large and powerful. Still, this is just step one in what could be a lengthy and messy court battle.

10 hours ago - Technology

Here's what the U.S. antitrust case charges Google with

Illustration: Eniola Odetunde/Axios

The Justice Department's new antitrust lawsuit against Google centers on the charge that Google has built a self-reinforcing machine to illegally insulate it from any serious competition in search.

Why it matters: DOJ spent more than a year investigating Google to assemble what prosecutors believe is the cleanest case for convincing a court that the company is deliberately hamstringing would-be competition. Both sides now face the likelihood of a bruising, years-long battle that could expand to touch on other aspects of Google's business.