Attorneys for former National Security Adviser John Bolton have asked a federal court to allow the relocation of classified materials central to his ongoing criminal case, arguing that current storage arrangements in Washington, D.C., impose an “unreasonable hardship” on the defense team.
Newsweek contacted attorneys for Bolton for comment via email outside of normal office hours on Wednesday.
Why It Matters
Bolton’s request, though procedural on its face, goes to the heart of how courts balance national security and a defendant’s right to a fair trial.
His lawyers argue that the long commute to a D.C. courthouse secure facility makes it unreasonably difficult to prepare his defense, while prosecutors must ensure classified information stays tightly controlled.
The outcome could set a precedent for how far courts can go in easing logistical burdens on defendants in sensitive-information cases without compromising government secrecy.
What To Know
Motion Seeks Easier Access To Classified Evidence
In a motion filed November 3, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Bolton’s lead counsel Abbe David Lowell requested permission to submit a sealed letter proposing an alternative Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) closer to Bolton’s home in Bethesda, Maryland.
The filing, entered under case number 8:25-cr-314-TDC, asks Judge Theodore D. Chuang to approve the confidential request for security reasons.
According to the motion, the defense team consulted with the Classified Information Security Officer (CISO) assigned to the case, who outlined the “default” SCIF location currently being used for the review of national-security files—a secure site located within a federal courthouse in the District of Columbia.
Lowell’s filing notes that he informed the CISO of “the hardship that commuting to the default SCIF location would impose on the defense team.”
The officer reportedly advised the defense to write to the court seeking authorization for an alternative facility.
While the precise details of the proposed location remain sealed, the defense argues that the distance between Bethesda and the federal facility in Washington makes the review of sensitive documents unnecessarily difficult for both Bolton and his legal representatives.
The Bethesda-to-downtown D.C. courthouse trip is roughly 10—12 miles, taking 30 to 60 minutes each way, and Bolton’s lawyers argue that repeated secure travel over that distance poses an unreasonable burden for the 76-year-old defendant and his team.
Legal Context
In legal terms, an “unreasonable hardship” typically refers to a burden that significantly impedes a party’s ability to prepare or participate in their defense, particularly when logistical or physical constraints interfere with due process.
There is no direct precedent using the phrase “unreasonable hardship” in a criminal defense setting but related legal standards—like the “undue hardship” test in Groff v. DeJoy (2023) and the “substantial need/undue hardship” rule in discovery law—support the idea that when a logistical or physical burden significantly impedes a party’s ability to prepare their case, courts may view it as an unreasonable obstacle to fair process.
In this case, Bolton’s attorneys contend that repeated travel to the D.C. facility constitutes such a burden.
Lowell’s motion does not contest the security protocols required for handling classified evidence but asks for a facility that would maintain equivalent protections closer to Bolton’s residence.
The defense argues that this adjustment would not compromise national security standards while improving efficiency in case preparation.
Broader Legal Questions
The request comes as part of the broader pretrial proceedings in a case that has drawn significant national attention.
John Bolton, who served as National Security Adviser under President Donald Trump from 2018 to 2019, was indicted in October 2025 on 18 counts of mishandling classified information.
According to the indictment, prosecutors allege Bolton retained and transmitted national defense materials without authorization, including personal diary-style notes describing sensitive government matters.
Some of the records were reportedly marked “Top Secret.”
Prosecutors also allege that Bolton shared some of those materials with relatives assisting in the preparation of his 2020 memoir, The Room Where It Happened, and that portions of his correspondence were later exposed after hackers linked to Iran gained access to his personal email account.
Bolton has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Lowell, a veteran defense attorney known for handling secure information cases, has stated that “the allegations at the heart of the case were investigated and resolved years ago.”
In an earlier public statement, he said the documents in question consist of “personal diaries over [Bolton’s] 45-year career—records that are unclassified, shared only with his immediate family, and known to the FBI as far back as 2021.”
Bolton himself has called the prosecution part of what he described as an effort to “intimidate [Trump’s] opponents,” but the current motion makes no political claims, focusing instead on logistical issues related to classified access.
The court has not yet ruled on whether the classified materials may be relocated or whether Bolton’s team will be permitted to use an alternative SCIF.
The request underscores the procedural challenges of cases involving national security information, where access restrictions often slow litigation.
Under the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA), both prosecutors and defense counsel must conduct evidence review only in government-approved secure environments.
Bolton’s next court appearance is scheduled for November 21, 2025, in Greenbelt, Maryland.
Until the court acts on the motion, the defense must continue to access the D.C. courthouse facility for all classified material review.
What People Are Saying
John Bolton’s defense filing addressing the request and the rationale: “Counsel explained the hardship that commuting to the default SCIF location would impose on the defense team,” and also “For security purposes, including because the attached letter proposes a specific alternative SCIF location, good cause exists to allow the letter to be filed under seal.”
What Happens Next
Judge Theodore D. Chuang will decide whether to let John Bolton’s lawyers file their detailed request under seal to move the sensitive documents from a Washington, D.C., courthouse to a secure facility closer to his home in Bethesda.
If approved, security officials will review whether the alternative site meets federal standards before any relocation occurs.
Meanwhile, both sides will continue pretrial work under the Classified Information Procedures Act, which governs how classified evidence is handled.
The issue could be addressed at Bolton’s next hearing on November 21, and the outcome may shape how future courts balance defendants’ access needs against strict national security requirements.
Read the full article here
