Judge Authorized Alternative Service on Donald Trump
A federal judge allowed a subpoena to be delivered to an attorney via certified mail.
Updated on Sept. 23, 2026 in Law
Live Poll
Should federal agencies have unrestricted access to presidential records after a president leaves office?
Judge Theodore Chuang has authorized the service of a subpoena on Donald Trump via certified mail after determining that in-person delivery is impractical. The subpoena targets records returned to the former president following the August 2022 search of his Mar-a-Lago estate.
Why it matters
The ruling facilitates a FOIA complaint filed by LegalEagle and National Security Counselors seeking documents regarding correspondence between Donald Trump and government agencies since January 2025. Plaintiffs contend that a court-ordered preservation of these records is essential to prevent their destruction.
The court order authorizes the delivery of a subpoena duces tecum to attorney Caryn Schechtman via certified mail. This action follows the April 1, 2026, DOJ Office of Legal Counsel opinion declaring the Presidential Records Act unconstitutional.
The players
Theodore Chuang
He is a United States District Judge for the District of Maryland who issued the order for alternative service.
Donald Trump
He is the current President of the United States and the subject of the subpoena regarding records from his estate.
Caryn Schechtman
She is the attorney designated by the court to receive the subpoena on behalf of the former president.
The details
Attorneys from Brito PLLC, Sullivan & Cromwell, and DLA Piper had previously declined requests to accept service for the former president. The ongoing legal battle stems from a March 2026 complaint that seeks information on items seized in 2022 and returned to Donald Trump.
Timeline
August 8, 2022: FBI executed search of Mar-a-Lago.
March 2026: Plaintiffs filed FOIA complaint.
April 1, 2026: DOJ OLC issued opinion on Presidential Records Act.
May 2026: Judge Chuang issued preservation order.
September 22, 2026: Judge authorized alternative service of subpoena.
Political Context
This case navigates the legal complexities surrounding the Presidential Records Act, which defines the ownership and handling of documents produced by the executive branch. Critics and the DOJ have recently raised substantive questions about the law's constitutionality, complicating ongoing FOIA efforts.
This ruling establishes a procedural precedent that may affect how future legal documents are served against high-profile political figures. Taxpayers and citizens may see continued debate regarding the transparency and accessibility of executive branch records.
The takeaway
The court's decision to bypass traditional in-person service highlights the logistical difficulties in litigating against former high-ranking officials. Ensuring transparency for public records remains a central conflict between government agencies and private plaintiffs.
Further reading
For more on the current legal landscape, see the Law section.
Live Poll
Should federal agencies have unrestricted access to presidential records after a president leaves office?
