A US federal judge, namely US Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, needs more information from attorneys before he is able to decide whether or not the complete affidavit used to get a search warrant for former US President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate should remain sealed, media reports said on Thursday.

The US Justice Department told the court during a hearing that releasing the affidavit could jeopardize the ongoing investigation and threaten FBI agents if it is not redacted heavily.

Justice Department national security lawyer Jay Bratt argued that the threats made against the FBI and its agents following the raid would necessitate redacting information about agents that worked on the investigation from the moment it kicked off until the raid took place.

The Justice Department is also concerned that releasing the affidavits would dissuade future witnesses from taking part in any investigations and help prosecutors, Bratt was quoted as saying.

Some heavily-involved witnesses have already given very specific information that could potentially reveal their identity if the affidavit is unsealed, Bratt added.

Releasing the affidavit would provide a "roadmap" of the investigation to the public and reveal the probe’s next steps, the top lawyer explained.

Several media organizations requested that the affidavit be released with redactions, citing public interest, but the necessary redactions would be extensive and would take much of the purpose out of its release to the public, Bratt reportedly said during the hearing. 

Related News

Barrack pushes US agenda: Disarm Hezbollah, rebrand Syria policy

US knew fatal Rafah blast cause was not Hamas op., says journalist

Reinhart is set to hear more about the extent to which the government wishes to redact the affidavit next week, US media said.

Trump is facing a criminal investigation over potential violations of the Espionage Act and additional statutes relating to obstruction of justice, as well as the destruction of federal government records, according to the search warrant executed by FBI agents at the former President's home on Monday.

The search warrant shows that the federal investigation agency was after evidence that would convict Trump of mishandling classified documents, including several that were marked "top secret", which would have constituted a violation of three criminal statutes.

The search warrant authorized FBI agents to seize materials from Trump's Mar-a-Lago home to probe him for potentially violating the Espionage Act outlawing unauthorized retention of national security information that could "harm the United States or aid an adversary."

Days after the FBI raided Trump's Mar-a-Lago property in Palm Beach, Florida, the contents of the search warrant, were made public. They took 11 boxes worth of papers, including data deemed to be so secret that they could not be stated individually in the "receipt" of what was taken.

A day earlier, US Attorney General Merrick Garland said he "personally approved" the FBI raid on former US President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago home in Florida.

Trump later on, with a copy of the search warrant in his possession while declining to reveal its contents, said he would not oppose the unsealing of the warrant.

Trump reiterated his claim that the search was an "unprecedented political weaponization of law enforcement," which was later called out by Andrew Weissman, a former Justice Department official. He said Garland had "called Trump's bluff" by making it his responsibility to object or consent to the release of the document.