classified documents. and the fact she s restricted doj from even using them as they continue on in their investigation. elie, our legal mind here, does it say something to you the justice department is only asking an appeals court to put on hold parts of judge canon s order, not the whole thing? it does, don. this is as jessica said a limited appeal. it s also a strategic appeal. just for perspective here, we remember doj seized 11,000 documents out of mar-a-lago. they don t like the special master ruling as to any of it. they lost all 11,000 documents. what they re doing here is saying, okay, let s carve out the most important to us, doj, 100 of those documents. they ve essentially given up on there being a special master for the other 10,900 documents. they said with respect to the classified documents those should not go to the special master. we should be able to use them in our criminal investigation as well as our national security
into this dispute when it comes to classified documents and they said they re clearly the government s property. the former president has no claim to it and they said plaintiff has identified no harm for merely allowing criminal investigators to continue to review and use the same subset of seized material records. that is why courts have exercised great caution before interfering through civil actions with criminal investigations. they re really implying this judge, eileen cannon, they re implying she shouldn t have stepped in and the fact that zest restr she s restricted doj from using them as they continue the investigation. elie, our legal mind, does it say something to you that the justice department is only asking an appeals court to put on hold parts of judge cannon s order, not the whole thing? it does, don. this is as jessica said a limited appeal.
the white house on the same day. an issue of this magnitude must go through the normal legislative process. joining us now from washington, to take a closer look at this, national reporter for bloomberg politics and director of the d.r.e.a.m. action coalition and former latino outreach specialist. break down this court decision for us. i think what the court decision does is it puts on hold parts of president trump s decision to unwind daca. in other words, the judge said that president trump does not have proper legal basis or is not cited proper legal basis to throw off the people who are currently benefiting from daca protections of deportation and the work permits and they are allowed to continue renewing those permits. it did not say that president trump and his administration have to accept new applicants to daca. the important thing here to note