On Monday, Special Counsel Jack Smith's documents were ordered unsealed by Judge Aileen Cannon, who is overseeing the lawsuit involving secret materials filed by former President Donald Trump.
The lawyer asked for the papers to be sealed because they might show his trial strategy, as Newsweek reported.
The DOJ had previously served a subpoena on the court last year, requesting the return of secret records that the outgoing president had taken with him when he departed the White House in 2021.
The DOJ sent a subpoena to the court last year asking them to hand over secret papers that the former president took from the White House when he left office in 2021.
The former president pleaded not guilty and has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing. In August 2022, the FBI did a raid and found hundreds more papers still stored there in boxes.
Trump is has been accused of keeping classified and top-secret information from federal agents.
He is also currently the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination in 2024. He pleaded not guilty and has said many times that he did nothing wrong.
Smith filed papers in the case on Monday, and Cannon ordered that they be made public, going on to say that she was "mindful of the strong presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents."
Since Trump is facing charges related to the retention of national security information, his trial will adhere to the guidelines established by the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA), which regulates the admissibility of such documents in legal proceedings.
Smith has voiced his apprehension about making public any details concerning the government's CIPA motion. Nonetheless, Cannon, who was appointed by Trump for the 2020 nomination, determined that nothing was hidden.
Since the motions did not "contain or otherwise reveal classified information," Cannon ruled that Smith had failed to offer "sufficient justification" for filing them.
On Friday, a court document showed the defense's and Smith's teams' reaction to the first unsealing order, in which the defense asked for the records to be unsealed and Smith eventually agreed, but the prosecution wanted some redactions.
"The defendants did not oppose the Government's request, but reserved the right to challenge them later," Smith wrote, adding that a full unsealing could disclose classified defense counsel information about how government's CIPA motion.
"This is the same information that the Government proposed redacting. Because the Court rejected that position and ordered the Government to provide unredacted versions of the two docket entries to defense counsel, there is no justification for keeping them from the public."