The Justice Department has asked a special master to reject former President Donald J. Trump’s claims that he owns a variety of documents seized by the FBI from his Florida home and that he can use executive privilege to prevent criminal investigators from viewing some of them.

However, Mr. Trump’s lawyers have made the opposite case, outlining a broad vision of his authority to declare documents his personal property and to keep files from his presidency secret from the Biden-era executive branch.

On Monday, rival briefs were partially unsealed, revealing opposing viewpoints. The briefs were recently submitted to Judge Raymond J. Dearie, the special master in charge of resolving disputes over the status of approximately 13,000 documents and photographs seized in August.

The briefs’ release was the latest development in Mr. Trump’s efforts to prevent the Justice Department from using the trove of documents in its investigation into whether he illegally kept national security records at his Mar-a-Lago compound and obstructed the government’s repeated attempts to retrieve them.

Judge Dearie is now required to write a report recommending whether each of the files taken by Mr. Trump to Mar-a-Lago is government or personal property, and whether any are protected by attorney-client or executive privilege. Aileen M. Cannon of the Southern District of Florida, the judge who appointed him as special master, will make the final decision on the status of the documents.

One major issue that both judges will have to deal with is the scope of Mr. Trump’s authority to declare documents his personal property. A Federal District Court judge ruled in 2012 that it was up to the president to sort records in the White House as presidential or personal records before he left office.

Mr. Trump has used the ruling in a variety of ways, including claiming as his personal property documents submitted to him while he was president discussing various clemency applications. The Justice Department regards those presidential records as public property that must be deposited with the National Archives.

According to a Justice Department letter sent to Judge Dearie on Saturday, one of the files contained several documents, including two classified documents — one confidential and one secret — and three messages received by Mr. Trump after he was no longer president. According to the letter, the messages came from a book author, a religious leader, and a pollster.

While the letter provided no further details, the discovery may be significant because it suggests that Mr. Trump or someone in his orbit was doing something with some of the classified documents at Mar-a-Lago after Mr. Trump left office. The package was discussed in the letter because one of its pages was deemed potentially subject to attorney-client privilege; however, it was unclear whether there were other similar packages that did not raise attorney-client issues.

The special master review process may be terminated before Judge Dearie completes his report and recommendations, which are due next month, or before Judge Cannon issues any final ruling. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta is also considering a Justice Department request to overturn Judge Cannon’s decision to impose a special master.

Judge Cannon, a Trump appointee, surprised legal observers by intervening and granting the former president’s request for a master to vet the materials, as well as accepting the possibility that an ex-president could use executive privilege to prevent executive branch criminal investigators from seeing executive branch files.

The 11th Circuit has already overturned a portion of Judge Cannon’s order, which barred criminal investigators from accessing the 103 classified documents. Mr. Trump filed a partial appeal, claiming that the court lacked jurisdiction to remove such files from the special master review process, but the Supreme Court denied his request.

In a 65-page brief filed last week, Mr. Trump’s lawyers, Christopher Kise and James Trusty, urged the appellate court to allow the special master process to continue, arguing that Judge Cannon’s decision to bar criminal investigators from using the documents until the review is completed will boost “public trust and the perception of fairness.”

“Given the importance of this investigation,” they wrote, “it must be conducted in a manner that gives the public confidence in its outcome.”