No Rush To Release Mueller Report: DC Judge
“EPIC is not entitled to emergency injunction relief to obtain a document that did not exist a month ago,” a U.S. Justice Department lawyer argued in court Tuesday in Washington.
April 09, 2019 at 10:45 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
A federal judge in Washington refused on Tuesday to fast-track the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report on the Russia investigation, ruling that a group suing for those records had failed to show that it would be irreparably harmed by a slower disclosure process.
U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton said he appreciated the desire of the Electronic Privacy Information Center to obtain the Mueller report, a document detailing what he described as an “extremely important subject matter to the nation.” But Walton denied the group's push to have the Justice Department immediately begin the process of fulfilling the Freedom of Information Act request, saying, “I have not been convinced that irreparable harm has been established.”
Walton's ruling came as U.S. Attorney General William Barr, testifying in Congress on Tuesday, said he would deliver a redacted copy of Mueller's report to lawmakers “within a week.” Barr has been working with top advisers and Mueller to prepare the nearly 400-page report for public release. Questions are sure to remain, however, about the extent to which Barr has blacked out material from the report.
EPIC filed a lawsuit on March 22 demanding the release of the Mueller report, arguing that the public has the right to know the full scope of Russia's interference in the 2016 election.
The group's lawsuit, filed under the Freedom of Information Act, also argued the public was entitled to see what Mueller said about any attempt by President Donald Trump to obstruct the investigation into Russia's interference. Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded the evidence Mueller presented did not amount to an obstruction charge. Mueller, however, had not made any recommendation on such a charge.
At a hearing in Washington, EPIC lawyer Alan Butler argued the Justice Department should be required to immediately begin the process of producing the Mueller report, along with related records. Butler said the Mueller report and related records could help inform the “ongoing public debate” around the Russia investigation.
“Time really is of the essence,” he said.
Justice Department attorney Courtney Enlow said the two sides should engage after the anticipated release of the Mueller report in mid-April, arguing that they would “better understand the world we're living in.” At that point, she said, EPIC would be able to narrow the scope of a records request she described as “very broad.”
“EPIC is not entitled to emergency injunction relief to obtain a document that did not exist a month ago,” Enlow argued.
The Justice Department, Enlow said, has already agreed to put EPIC's request on an expedited track but other requests are ahead of it. EPIC, she said, should not be allowed to “leapfrog” the other requests “simply because they filed a lawsuit.”
Barr is set to return to the House and Senate for hearings focused on the Mueller investigation. On Monday, the leaders of the House Judiciary Committee agreed to also call on Mueller to testify.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Grants Special Counsel's Motion, Dismisses Criminal Case Against Trump Without Prejudice
Big Law Lawyers Fan Out for Election Day Volunteering in Call Centers and Litigation
7 minute readSupreme Court Being Dragged Into Last-Minute Election Disputes
Many Americans Don't Trust the Supreme Court This Election; David Boies Isn't One of Them
Trending Stories
- 1As 'Red Hot' 2024 for Legal Industry Comes to Close, Leaders Reflect and Share Expectations for Next Year
- 2Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 3Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 4Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 5Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250