Judge Pierces Mueller Report Secrecy, Orders Material Disclosed to House Democrats
In a 75-page opinion, Howell dismissed Justice Department claims that redacted portions of the report should remain secret due to ongoing criminal cases stemming from Mueller's probe.
October 25, 2019 at 03:47 PM
4 minute read
A federal judge on Friday ordered the U.S. Justice Department to disclose to House Democrats secret portions of the special counsel's report on the Russia investigation, along with other materials concealed under grand secrecy rules, in a decision that pointed to the ongoing impeachment inquiry.
Chief U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell's ruling delivered a victory to the House Judiciary Committee in its drawn-out legal battle for the full findings of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller III, who in March concluded his two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. In his summary of his office's findings, Mueller reported that he uncovered no evidence that the Trump campaign conspired with the Kremlin, but he documented several episodes of possible efforts by the president to obstruct the investigation.
In a 75-page opinion, Howell, nominated by President Barack Obama in 2010, pointed to the House Democrats' ongoing impeachment inquiry as a "judicial process" that falls under an exception to grand jury secrecy rules, allowing Congress to access some of the most sensitive testimony and other information obtained by Mueller's team.
Several weeks ago, the House formally initiated an impeachment inquiry focused on President Donald Trump's alleged use of his office for personal gain. House investigators are looking into, among other things, whether Trump improperly leveraged U.S. military aid to pressure the president of Ukraine to investigate Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
"In carrying out the weighty constitutional duty of determining whether impeachment of the president is warranted, Congress need not redo the nearly two years of effort spent on the Special Counsel's investigation, nor risk being misled by witnesses, who may have provided information to the grand jury and the special counsel that varies from what they tell [the House Judiciary Committee]," Howell wrote.
Howell, who as chief judge presides over grand jury matters in Washington federal court, cited the public's substantial interest in the Mueller probe in ruling for the House Judiciary Committee, or HJC.
She dismissed Justice Department claims that redacted portions of the report should remain secret due to ongoing criminal cases stemming from Mueller's probe.
"The need for continued secrecy is minimal and thus easily outweighed by HJC's compelling need for the material," the judge said. "Tipping the scale even further toward disclosure is the public's interest in a diligent and thorough investigation into, and in a final determination about, potentially impeachable conduct by the president described in the Mueller Report."
The House Judiciary Committee, Howell said, "needs the requested material not only to investigate fully but also to reach a final determination about conduct by the President described in the Mueller Report."
The House Judiciary Committee voted in May to hold Attorney General William Barr in contempt over his refusal to furnish the panel with a full, unredacted copy of the special counsel's 448 page report. In negotiations with House leaders, the Justice Department's top congressional liaison, Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd, agreed to make all but the grand jury information—"98.5 percent" of the Mueller report, he wrote in one letter—available to a dozen lawmakers.
In a statement Friday, the committee's chairman, U.S. Rep. Jerrod Nadler, said he was "gratified" by Howell's ruling.
"The court's thoughtful ruling recognizes that our impeachment inquiry fully comports with the Constitution and thoroughly rejects the spurious White House claims to the contrary," he said. "This grand jury information that the administration has tried to block the House from seeing will be critical to our work."
Howell gave the government until Oct. 30 to release to the House the redacted portions of Mueller's report.
Read Howell's full opinion below:
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 AllJay Clayton, Ex-SEC Chief and Sullivan & Cromwell Lawyer, Eyed For Manhattan US Attorney's Office
Trump Election-Interference Prosecution Appears on Course to Wind Down
4 minute read'Dismissal Required'?: Trump Cites Another Supreme Court Ruling in DC Jan. 6 Case
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Cars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
- 2How Cybercriminals Exploit Law Firms’ Holiday Vulnerabilities
- 3DOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
- 4GEO Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 5Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
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