UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

v. 

SEALED SEARCH WARRANT 

/ 

Case No. 22-mj-8489-BER 

Case No. 22-mj-8533-BER 

Case No. 22-mj-8534-BER 

Case No. 22-mj-8547-BER 

Case No. 22-mj-8548-BER 

Case No. 22-mj-8549-BER 

Case No. 22-mj-8550-BER 

MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS’ MOTION TO INTERVENE 

AND TO UNSEAL SEARCH WARRANT MATERIALS 

Last week, this Court unsealed an order granting the Government’s motion to disclose 

materials relating to eight search warrants to former President Donald J. Trump and his codefendant, Waltine Nauta, as discovery in the criminal case against them. The connection 

between seven of those warrants and the prosecution of the former President was previously 

unknown to the public. In light of this new information, which is of immense public interest, the 

Media Intervenors1 move to intervene in these matters for the limited purpose of seeking an 

 

1

 The “Media Intervenors” consist of the following news organizations, many of which sought 

and were granted intervention in United States v. Sealed Search Warrant (“Mar-a-Lago Search 

Warrant Proceeding”), Case No. 22-mj-8332-BER: Advance Publications, Inc.; American 

Broadcasting Companies, Inc.; the Associated Press; Bloomberg L.P.; Cable News Network, 

Inc.; CBS Broadcasting Inc. o/b/o CBS News.; CMG Media Corporation; Dow Jones & 

Company, Inc., publisher of The Wall Street Journal; the E.W. Scripps Company; The Palm 

Beach Post, and USA TODAY, publications operated by subsidiaries of Gannett Co., Inc.; Fort 

Myers Broadcasting Company; Fox News Network, LLC; Gray Media Group, Inc.; Guardian 

News & Media Limited; Insider Inc.; Los Angeles Times Communications LLC, publisher of 

The Los Angeles Times; the McClatchy Company, LLC d/b/a the Miami Herald; NBCUniversal 

Media, LLC d/b/a NBC News; Orlando Sentinel Media Group, publisher of the Orlando 

Sentinel; POLITICO LLC; Radio Television Digital News Association; Reuters News & Media 

Inc.; Sun-Sentinel Company, LLC, publisher of the South Florida Sun Sentinel; TEGNA Inc.; 

Telemundo Network Group LLC d/b/a Noticias Telemundo; The New York Times Company; 

Times Publishing Company, publisher of the Tampa Bay Times; Tribune Publishing Company; 

Univision Networks & Studios, Inc.; and WP Company LLC d/b/a The Washington Post. 

Case 9:22-mj-08549-BER Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2023 Page 1 of 6
2 

order unsealing all documents filed with this Court relating to the additional search warrants (the 

“Additional Search Warrant Materials”).2 

The Court should require the Government to establish that the continued sealing of those 

portions is warranted under the stringent standards that necessarily apply to the sealing of 

judicial records. Only if the Court finds that the Government has met this heavy burden should 

the materials remain sealed. 

ARGUMENT 

A. The Media Intervenors Have Standing to Intervene in this Matter. 

As the Eleventh Circuit has explained, “[t]he press has standing to intervene in actions to 

which it is otherwise not a party in order to petition for access to court proceedings and records.” 

Comm’r, Ala. Dep’t of Corr. v. Advance Local Media, LLC, 918 F.3d 1161, 1170 (11th Cir. 

2019); see also United States v. Sealed Search Warrant (“Mar-a-Lago Search Warrant 

Proceeding”), Case No. 22-mj-8332-BER (S.D. Fla.), ECF Nos. 11, 26, 35 (granting intervention 

to media organizations for limited purpose of seeking access to materials related to search 

warrant executed at former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence). The Media Intervenors 

are news organizations that have been covering the investigation and criminal prosecution of 

Trump, and they therefore have standing to intervene in these proceedings for the limited 

purpose of seeking access to the Additional Search Warrant Materials. 

B. This Court Should Unseal the Additional Search Warrant Materials. 

On August 8, 2022, the public learned that agents from the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation had executed a search warrant and seized multiple boxes of records at former 

 

2

 The Media Intervenors are filing an identical motion in each of the seven dockets pertaining to 

the Additional Search Warrant Materials. 

Case 9:22-mj-08549-BER Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2023 Page 2 of 6
3 

President Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago that day. Recognizing “the intense public and historical 

interest in an unprecedented search of a former President’s residence,” Mar-a-Lago Search 

Warrant Proceeding, ECF No. 80 at 13, this Court granted media organizations’ motions to 

unseal in part and directed the Government to file a redacted version of the Mar-a-Lago search 

warrant affidavit, id. ECF No. 94. Since then, as more information has come to light about the 

investigation and eventual indictment of former President Trump for mishandling classified 

documents and obstruction of justice, this Court has issued a series of orders further unsealing 

portions of the Mar-a-Lago search warrant affidavit and related documents. Id. ECF Nos. 99, 

130, 154, 164. 

One of the documents recently unsealed by this Court, a June 12, 2023 order granting the 

Government’s motion to disclose search warrant materials to the defendants in the criminal case 

against former President Trump and one of his employees, United States v. Donald J. Trump and 

Waltine Nauta, Case No. 23-cr-80101-AMC, referenced seven docket numbers for sealed search 

warrant proceedings beyond the Mar-a-Lago search warrant that was already known to the 

public. Mar-a-Lago Search Warrant Proceeding, ECF No. 146. 

For the same reasons that have justified granting public access to substantial portions of 

the Mar-a-Lago search warrant affidavit, both before and after the indictment of former President 

Trump, this Court should unseal the Additional Search Warrant Materials. As this Court has 

recognized, the public has a right of access to search warrant materials, and it is the 

Government’s burden to justify sealing them. See id. ECF No. 80 at 3-5; see also, e.g., United 

States v. Peterson, 627 F. Supp. 2d 1359, 1374 (M.D. Ga. 2008); United States v. Vives, 2006 

U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92973, at *2-3 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 21, 2006); In re Four Search Warrants, 945 F. 

Supp. 1563, 1567 (N.D. Ga. 1996); In re Search of Office Suites for World & Islam Studies 

Case 9:22-mj-08549-BER Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2023 Page 3 of 6
4 

Enter., 925 F. Supp. 738, 742 (M.D. Fla. 1996); United States v. Shenberg, 791 F. Supp. 292, 

293 (S.D. Fla. 1991). 

The Government’s stated justifications for sealing the Mar-a-Lago search warrant 

affidavit were that “disclosure would reveal (1) the identities of witnesses, law enforcement 

agencies, and uncharged parties, (2) the investigation’s strategy, direction, scope, sources, and 

methods, and (3) grand jury information protected by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e).” 

Mar-a-Lago Search Warrant Proceeding, ECF No. 94 at 1. The Court correctly noted, in 

weighing these initial arguments, that there were portions of the Mar-a-Lago affidavit—and, 

indeed, most warrant materials—“that at least presumptively could be unsealed” without 

compromising those Government interests. Id. ECF No. 86 at 53; see also id. at 16-17. It 

ultimately rejected the Government’s argument that the “record justifi[ed] keeping the entire 

Affidavit under seal,” and directed the Government to propose redactions. Id. ECF No. 80 at 13. 

To the extent that the Government offers the same justifications for maintaining the 

Additional Search Warrant Materials under seal, it bears the burden of demonstrating that it “has 

a sufficiently important interest in secrecy that outweighs the public’s right of access” and that 

there is no “less onerous (or, said differently, a more narrowly tailored) alternative to sealing.” 

Id. at 5. As the indictment against former President Trump has already been unsealed, and this 

Court has unsealed portions of the Mar-a-Lago warrant papers, the Government faces an 

especially tough burden as to these remaining Additional Search Warrant Materials. See 

Peterson, 627 F. Supp. 2d at 1373-74 (“judicial documents should not be sealed indefinitely; 

they should only remained sealed when some interest would be adversely affected if the 

documents were made public”); In re Search of Office Suites, 925 F. Supp. at 742 (“In most 

Case 9:22-mj-08549-BER Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2023 Page 4 of 6
5 

instances . . . once the warrant and application have been returned to the court, the public and 

press should have full access.”). 

Even if, based on this Court’s independent review, the Government can meet its 

substantial burden as to select portions of the Additional Search Warrant Materials, the 

remainder of these judicial records should be unsealed. See, e.g., Vives, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 

92973, at *3 (conducting independent review of Government’s assertions that redactions to 

search warrant affidavit were “essential to preserve higher values” and “narrowly tailored to 

serve the interest,” and unsealing portions of affidavit for which Government had not met its 

burden). 

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons, the Media Intervenors respectfully request that the Court enter 

an order permitting them to intervene in these proceedings and unsealing the Additional Search 

Warrant Materials. The Media Intervenors further request that the Court place its order on their 

motion, and any accompanying opinion, on the public docket as well. 

CERTIFICATION OF GOOD-FAITH CONFERENCE 

Pursuant to Local Rule 88.9(a), undersigned counsel certify that on July 18, 2023, they 

made reasonable efforts to confer via email with counsel for the Government and counsel for 

former President Trump. Counsel for Trump did not respond, and counsel for the Government 

stated that the Government opposes this motion.

Dated: July 21, 2023

THOMAS AND LOCICERO PL

By: /s/ Carol Jean LoCicero 

Carol Jean LoCicero (FBN 603030) 

601 South Boulevard 

Tampa, FL 33606 

Telephone: 813.984.3060 

Respectfully submitted, 

BALLARD SPAHR LLP 

By: /s/ Charles D. Tobin 

Charles D. Tobin (FBN 816345) 

1909 K Street NW, 12th Floor 

Washington, DC 20006 

Telephone: 202.661.2218 

Case 9:22-mj-08549-BER Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2023 Page 5 of 6
6 

clocicero@tlolawfirm.com 

Dana J. McElroy (FBN 845906) 

Karen Williams Kammer (FBN 771200) 

Daniela B. Abratt (FBN 118053) 

915 Middle River Drive, Suite 309 

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33304 

Telephone: 954.703.3418 

dmcelroy@tlolawfirm.com 

kkammer@tlolawfirm.com 

dabratt@tlolawfirm.com 

Attorneys for CBS Broadcasting Inc., Fort 

Myers Broadcasting Company, the 

McClatchy Company, LLC d/b/a the Miami 

Herald, The New York Times Company, SunSentinel Company, LLC, publisher of the 

South Florida Sun Sentinel, and Times 

Publishing Company 

SHULLMAN FUGATE PLLC 

By: /s/ Rachel E. Fugate 

Rachel E. Fugate (FBN 144029) 

Deanna K. Shullman (FBN 514462) 

Minch Minchin (FBN 1015950) 

2101 Vista Parkway, Suite 4006 

West Palm Beach, FL 33411 

Telephone: 813.935.5098 

rfugate@shullmanfugate.com 

dshullman@shullmanfugate.com 

mminchin@shulmanfugate.com 

Attorneys for American Broadcasting 

Companies, Inc., CMG Media Corporation, 

Dow Jones & Company, Inc., Guardian 

News & Media Limited, Orlando Sentinel 

Media Group, publisher of the Orlando 

Sentinel, and Tribune Publishing Company

tobinc@ballardspahr.com 

Attorneys for Advance Publications, Inc., the 

Associated Press, Bloomberg L.P., Cable 

News Network, Inc., the E.W. Scripps 

Company, Fox News Network, LLC, Gray 

Media Group, Inc., Insider Inc., Los Angeles 

Times Communications LLC, publisher of The 

Los Angeles Times, NBCUniversal Media, 

LLC, Radio Television Digital News 

Association, Reuters News & Media Inc., 

TEGNA Inc., Telemundo Network Group LLC 

d/b/a Noticias Telemundo, WP Company LLC 

d/b/a The Washington Post, and Univision 

Network & Studios, Inc. 

ATHERTON GALARDI MULLEN & 

REEDER PLLC 

By: /s/ L. Martin Reeder, Jr. 

L. Martin Reeder, Jr. (FBN 308684) 

1641 Worthington Road, Suite 11 

West Palm Beach, FL 33409 

Telephone: 561.293.2530 

martin@athertonlg.com 

Attorneys for The Palm Beach Post and USA 

TODAY, publications operated by 

subsidiaries of Gannett Co., Inc. 

Case 9:22-mj-08549-BER Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2023 Page 6 of 6