At Extraordinary Hearing, Judge Questions Power to Stop Bolton Book That's Been Widely Distributed
Still, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth pressed Bolton's lawyer at length about whether he had moved forward with publication of the book, a damning account of his tenure in Trump's White House, before the prepublication review process had been completed.
June 19, 2020 at 03:00 PM
6 minute read
Saying the proverbial horse is "out of the barn," a federal judge on Friday questioned his ability to block the release of John Bolton's memoir, while also raising doubts about whether the former Trump national security adviser had fulfilled his obligation to have the book scrubbed of classified information.
U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth, a more than 30-year veteran of Washington's federal trial court, noted at the outset of a hearing held over videoconference that Bolton's memoir had already been printed and distributed widely to bookstores, reviewers and reporters ahead of its planned release on June 23.
Drawing on his San Antonio roots, Lamberth said, "the horse, as we used to say in Texas, seems to be out of the barn." Lamberth appeared skeptical about what he could do "about those books all over the country."
Still, Lamberth pressed Bolton's lawyer at length about whether he had moved forward with publication of the book, a damning account of his tenure in Trump's White House, before the prepublication review process had been completed. That process is common for authors who recount their time in high-level government posts.
Justice Department lawyer David Morrell called Bolton a "disgruntled" former official whose "brazenness" should not be awarded. "He created this problem," argued Morrell, a senior lawyer in the Justice Department's civil division.
Morrell said Bolton's decision to move forward with publication marked a "flagrant breach" of nondisclosure agreements tied to his past service in the Trump administration.
Bolton's lawyer, Charles Cooper of Washington's Cooper & Kirk, insisted that Bolton had completed his side of the bargain, submitting a manuscript for review and working with U.S. officials to avoid the disclosure of any classified information. Describing the hearing repeatedly as "surreal," he also argued that Bolton has no control over the bookstores and companies that have copies of the book.
Any ruling against the Justice Department's bid to stop distribution of the book would not necessarily signal a win for Bolton. The government's original complaint seeks to strip Bolton of any profit from his memoir, for which he has reportedly been paid $2 million.
Lamberth agreed to hold the hearing a day after the Justice Department requested an "emergency" order preventing the release of Bolton's memoir. Many major news organizations have published reviews of the book, which, among other things, contends Trump sought help from China to win the upcoming presidential election.
As episodes detailed in Bolton's manuscript have emerged ahead of the memoir's planned Tuesday release, Trump has rebuked his former national security adviser, calling him "washed up" and his book a "compilation of lies and made up stories." Trump has even suggested Bolton should face criminal charges.
"I will consider every conversation with me as president highly classified," he told reporters at the White House. "So that would mean that, if he wrote a book and if the book gets out, he's broken the law, and I would think that he would have criminal problems. I hope so."
In a court filing late Thursday, Cooper asked Lamberth to dismiss the administration's lawsuit. He argued that Bolton had not violated any nondisclosure agreements tied to his White House tenure and that the bid to block the book's release was moot since the memoir has been published and distributed not only throughout the U.S. but also abroad.
"It is clear from this evidence that the White House has abused the prepublication-review and classification process, and has asserted fictional national security concerns as a pretext to censor, or at least to delay indefinitely, Ambassador Bolton's right to speak," Cooper wrote.
Ahead of Friday's hearing, prominent national news organizations and other free-speech advocates filed briefs arguing that the Trump administration's lawsuit should be swiftly dismissed.
In a brief for PEN American, a nonprofit that represents reporters and other writers, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher partners Theodore Boutrous said any order barring the release of Bolton's book, titled "The Room Where It Happened," would mark an unconstitutional prior restraint.
Boutrous, who had previously authored a Washington Post op-ed criticizing the Trump administration's lawsuit, added that the Justice Department would likely also fail on its claim that Bolton had neglected to complete the mandated prepublication review process.
"It is not difficult to see what is going on: The president is employing the apparatus of the federal government to punish his political enemies, thwart freedom of speech, and pursue his political interests in an election year."
At the end of Friday's hearing, Morrell kept with the barnyard metaphors to describe Bolton's defense as "hogwash" and argue that, in moving forward with the release of his memoir, the former Trump adviser had "swung the barnyard doors open" and "let the horse run out."
"The question is who let the horse out of the barn. And the answer to that question is clear," Morrell said. "It's Mr. Bolton."
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 All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readWill Khan Resign? FTC Chair Isn't Saying Whether She'll Stick Around After Giving Up Gavel
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending 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