Federal Judge Questions Whether DOJ 'Manipulated' Him in McCabe Public Records Suit
Federal prosecutors denied any deception, arguing their court statements in a pending Freedom of Information Act lawsuit were made in good faith.
November 14, 2019 at 06:38 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
A federal judge on Thursday questioned whether the U.S. Justice Department had "manipulated" him into stalling the release of records related to Andrew McCabe, the former deputy FBI director who has faced a criminal investigation since last year centered on whether he lied to federal agents.
At a hearing in Washington's federal trial court, U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton grew animated as he grilled Justice Department lawyers about their recent shift in a lawsuit brought by the watchdog group Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington. The group is seeking records related to an internal FBI inquiry into McCabe's dealings with the news media.
For months, the Justice Department had argued that records should be withheld on the ground that they related to an ongoing law enforcement proceeding. But on Wednesday, the Justice Department abandoned that argument for keeping the records secret, signaling that prosecutors could be standing down from pursuing charges against McCabe. Prosecutors still haven't publicly stated the status of any ongoing investigation.
Walton appeared struck by the sudden shift in the litigation, saying Thursday he had agreed to delays based on the Justice Department's position.
"I do have some concern about whether I was manipulated. … It does cause me concern," Walton said.
Justice Department lawyer Justin Sandberg said his arguments for withholding the records were made in "good faith" and had been "amply justified."
"Your honor," he said, "you're not being manipulated."
Walton had set a Nov. 15 deadline for the government to inform him whether prosecutors were planning to bring charges against McCabe. Walton reportedly said at the earlier hearing: "This matter is a high-profile matter. And I think it does, while the matter hangs in limbo, it does undermine the credibility, not only of the Justice Department because it's not making these hard decisions, but also the court, because Congress enacted this [open records] legislation for the purpose of the American public being made aware of what its government is doing."
At Thursday's hearing, Walton did not explicitly ask whether the Justice Department had decided to drop its investigation into McCabe. But "something must have happened" for the Justice Department to discard arguments for keeping records concealed, the judge said. "It does cause me to have some question about why," Walton said.
Sandberg did not provide any firm answer, prompting Walton to voice frustration with the Justice Department's drawn-out consideration of its McCabe inquiry. Walton said it was "not a hard case" to weigh. "Maybe politically, but not factually or legally," he said.
Sandberg at one point offered to speak privately with Walton. After speaking in his chambers for 10 minutes, they emerged and set a schedule under which the Justice Department will produce 200 documents a month to CREW.
McCabe's defense lawyers in September asked prosecutors whether a grand jury had declined to indict him. The email, sent by Michael Bromwich, now a senior counsel at Steptoe & Johnson LLP, followed press reports that a grand jury had met to consider charges against McCabe without issuing an indictment.
McCabe's defense lawyers had previously appealed to Deputy Attorney General Jeff Rosen, arguing that the Justice Department lacked evidence to charge him. Rosen ultimately declined to step in to stave off a prosecution.
Last year, the Justice Department's inspector general concluded that McCabe misled internal investigators when asked about his role providing information to a Wall Street Journal reporter in 2016 about an investigation into the Clinton Foundation. The inspector general, Michael Horowitz, referred those findings to prosecutors in Washington.
McCabe has long disputed that he lacked candor in the internal investigation. In March 2018, McCabe was fired just days before he was set to retire with full benefits. McCabe, represented by Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, contested his firing in a lawsuit this year that alleged his removal was part of an "unconstitutional plan" by the Trump administration to oust law enforcement officials deemed disloyal to the president.
The Justice Department filed court papers earlier this month to dismiss the case, which is pending before U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss in Washington. "If the FBI finds that one of its special agents lacked candor under oath, the standard penalty is removal," DOJ lawyers said in court papers. "Andrew G. McCabe was one of those special agents."
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 AllTwo Judges. 60-Plus Years on the Bench. Plenty of Advice.
Why Litigation Demand Might Break Firms’ Boom-and-Bust Cycle
Litigation Leaders: Mark Jones of Nelson Mullins on Helping Clients Assemble ‘Dream Teams’
Litigators of the Week: After Two Big Wins for Plaintiffs, a Defense Verdict for Infant Formula Makers
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Regulatory Upheaval Is Coming. How Businesses Prepare and Respond Will Separate Winners and Losers
- 2Cravath Elevates 7 to Partnership, Up From Last Year
- 3Kline & Specter Hit With Lawsuit From Another Former Associate
- 4USPTO Director Kathi Vidal Announces Resignation Ahead of Administration Change
- 5As Gen AI Acceptance Grows, Lawyers Race to Mitigate Risks
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