Hemming and Hawing, US DOJ Coughs Up Sessions' Foreign-Contact Form
The U.S. Justice Department on Thursday released a portion of Attorney General Jeff Sessions' security clearance documents in response to a public-records lawsuit, but at a subsequent court hearing, attorneys were still quibbling over the disclosure.
July 14, 2017 at 12:30 AM
4 minute read
The U.S. Justice Department on Thursday released a portion of Attorney General Jeff Sessions' security clearance documents in response to a public-records lawsuit, but at a subsequent court hearing, attorneys were still quibbling over the disclosure.
American Oversight, a nonprofit watchdog group that has sued numerous federal agencies for Trump-related documents, filed the Sessions-related lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in April.
The complaint sought a portion of Sessions-signed paperwork relating to any foreign contacts he had in the past seven years. The group also requested any FBI records that would address any contact between the then-U.S. senator from Alabama and Russians. The Justice Department released a single page in response Thursday, one day after a court-ordered deadline to do so. The department did not release any notes, because, lawyers said at a court hearing, the agency found no responsive records on Sessions' Russian contacts.
According to court filings, DOJ officials made the decision to disclose the document in “consultation with the attorney general.” The lawsuit shows how entangled top Trump administration lawyers have been, and could be, in litigation in the coming months.
The Justice Department, according to American Oversight, resisted revealing the document, in what American Oversight executive director Austin Evers called a “really troubling 24 hours.”
The DOJ asked American Oversight on Wednesday for a 36-hour extension to produce the documents. In its court filing Thursday, DOJ lawyers said they released the single page in consultation with the attorney general. The government, still asserting its authority to withhold the Sessions record, said it “has consented to a discretionary release” of the document.
“Reading between the lines, what happened yesterday is that what should be a cut-and-dry political FOIA decision wound up on the desk of the attorney general or the people around him and it got very complicated all of a sudden,” Evers told reporters after the hearing.
The Justice Department had confirmed in May that Sessions indeed met with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak last year and did not disclose the meeting on the form. A DOJ spokeswoman said an FBI employee told Sessions and his staff that he didn't need to list meetings with ambassadors that occurred in connection to his work as a senator.
The DOJ did not release the signature page of the form Thursday. In the court hearing, DOJ lawyer Anjali Motgi said the agency did not believe that was a clear part of American Oversight's request. U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss of the District of Columbia disagreed, and asked Motgi to consult with the DOJ about releasing the form. Motgi said she would, but that she could not at that time guarantee its release.
“Let's just be really clear what the signature says,” Evers said. “It's below the line that says, 'If I lie on this form it's perjury.' They didn't want to turn that over.”
The single page the DOJ filed is heavily redacted, but clearly shows Sessions checked “no,” that neither he nor his family members had any contact with the Russian government in the past seven years.
American Oversight's lawyers said they will consult with the DOJ about its search process for any additional, relevant records about Sessions' meetings with foreign nationals. “We're going to really pressure test whether the DOJ did its job,” Evers said.
Related Articles:
|- Chuck Cooper Confirms: He's AG Jeff Sessions' Lawyer
- What the Election-Law Camp Is Saying About Donald Trump Jr.'s Emails
- Mueller Bolsters Russia Team's Appellate Readiness in New Hire
- As Russia Probes Mount, White-Collar Lawyers Hit Prime Time
- High-Profile Team Sues Trump Campaign, Alleging Role in DNC Hack
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 All3rd Circuit Nominee Mangi Sees 'No Pathway to Confirmation,' Derides 'Organized Smear Campaign'
4 minute readJudge Grants Special Counsel's Motion, Dismisses Criminal Case Against Trump Without Prejudice
Ex-Deputy AG Trusts U.S. Legal System To Pull Country Through Times of Duress
7 minute read'Even Playing Field?' Wiley Rein Intervenes in Federal Election Campaign Spending Row
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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