Who watches the record keepers? I have three top-line takeaways, any one of which could be explained in much greater detail. First, NARA has far outstripped its statutory role and the public has been bamboozled about its function. Given the to-date unexplained and hasty April 2022 resignation of David Ferriero, the prior Archivist of the United States, and the subsequent, unprecedented statement by NARA that all records of all prior administrations (other than Trump!) had been turned over, a statement now proved obviously false, it is incumbent upon the new Congress to investigate, impeach, and potentially remove Debra Wall, the current acting Archivist.

Second, the new Congress should consider legislation to clarify NARA’s role, and perhaps even repeal or amend the Presidential Records Act, both for the protection of Congress and because that act is of dubious constitutionality. Certain actions of the Justice Department and some federal courts could be construed to place even members of Congress in the crosshairs under their own recordkeeping responsibilities. Setting aside the constitutionality of the PRA, if Congress truly wants to live under a regime where the independent bureaucracy can make decisions, it might consider leaning in the other direction: making members’ records property of Congress, and defunding the ability of members to destroy records (as Pelosi surely did with her own J6 records prior to the new Congress).

Finally, all prospective conservative presidential campaigns, including that of Donald Trump, for whom I proudly served, should be cognizant of the playing field and should consider concrete steps to protect their agendas while serving the goal of transparency to Congress and the American people.

[I think we’re overthinking this. The real question isn’t who’s watching the record keepers, but why we treat violations differently when famous people commit them — and even then, differently depending on *which* famous people break the law. This is an issue of equality before the law versus the development of a de facto American nobility. And this is not the only context in which this inequity occurs, either. — Ed]