In a latest U.S. court ruling on Wednesday, U.S. District Judge John Bates concluded that the 1978 statute is likely constitutional and granted a preliminary injunction that essentially nullifies the opinion issued last month by DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel.

A federal judge has ordered aides to President Donald Trump to continue to observe the requirements of the Presidential Records Act, despite a Justice Department opinion that found the law unconstitutionally intrudes on presidential power.

“The original public meaning of the text of the Constitution, canons of interpretation, Supreme Court precedent, general principles of property law, and almost 50 years of practice confirm that Congress has the enumerated power to regulate presidential records under the Constitution’s Property Clause,” Bates wrote.

Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, faulted the OLC opinion for relying on a “stark misreading” of Supreme Court precedent. He also rejected the Justice Department’s arguments that the law is unconstitutional because presidential papers were considered the personal property of the president until the 1970s.

He also noted that the Trump administration observed the law without objection during his first term.

Bates acted on a pair of lawsuits filed last month by groups representing historians, transparency advocates, and journalists.

“This ruling fundamentally misunderstands the administration's position, and we are confident that we will ultimately prevail.” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement. She said the White House does not allow aides to delete electronic records and will continue to enforce that policy.

Additionally, the judge’s order takes effect May 26, giving the Trump administration less than a week to try to get a higher court to step in. It’s unclear how uniformly the administration has been observing the DOJ opinion, since the National Archives continues to make records of prior presidents available under the law.