'I'm Baffled': Judge Questions 'Good Faith' of DOJ in Roger Stone Records Case
"I'm really unpersuaded by your argument about manipulation here," U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss told a DOJ attorney. "I'm baffled by it, given what the department has done here."
July 08, 2020 at 04:51 PM
4 minute read
A hearing in a public records lawsuit tied to Roger Stone's sentencing got heated Wednesday, as a federal judge questioned whether the Justice Department was acting in "good faith" in its handling of the records request.
Lawyers with Loevy & Loevy filed the lawsuit on behalf of BuzzFeed News reporter Jason Leopold in April, over a Freedom of Information Act request he submitted to DOJ for records relating to President Donald Trump's tweet criticizing prosecutors' original sentencing recommendation for Stone and the decision to override that initial memo.
DOJ lawyers filed a motion to dismiss the case, saying they agreed to expedite the request and the complaint itself did not center on the actual production of documents. They also argued the complaint itself was filed prematurely, because it landed in federal court only 13 days after Leopold submitted his FOIA request.
On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss of the District of Columbia sharply criticized the Justice Department for granting the motion to expedite and then seeking to dismiss the case. He questioned why the agency would agree to quick processing, but then not follow through on that action.
"I'm not sure that letter granting expedition was, frankly, provided in good faith and is meaningful in any respect if, as I understand it right now," DOJ is "not going to process the request at all?" Moss asked.
Justice Department lawyer Christopher Lynch denied Moss' suggestion that the agency threw the FOIA request "in the trash." He said the same documents were requested separately and are the subject of a different lawsuit. Leopold also filed that complaint, which covers a wider range of documents tied to Stone's sentencing recommendation.
Lynch also said agency lawyers contacted Leopold's legal counsel and suggested they amend the complaint to avoid the issues raised at Wednesday's hearing, but they declined to do so.
However, Moss went after Lynch's argument that Leopold's lawyers were "engaging in gamesmanship" by not amending their complaint and claiming it did cover the production of documents.
"I'm really unpersuaded by your argument about manipulation here," Moss said. "I'm baffled by it, given what the department has done here."
The judge said Leopold had a proper claim to file a lawsuit over his request for expedition of his records request and could have amended the complaint once the government failed to produce documents by the 20-day deadline set under FOIA. "They didn't get ahead of anybody in the process by doing that," Moss added.
Justice Department attorney Elizabeth Shapiro eventually cut in, saying the department would be willing to accept an amended complaint from Leopold and the case could move forward to discussing a production schedule.
Josh Burday, the Loevy & Loevy attorney arguing on Leopold's behalf Wednesday, denied the government's interpretation of events. He said the legal team did not turn down the suggestion to amend the complaint, but had asked to discuss a production schedule for the documents as well. "That's entirely inaccurate, your honor," Lynch interrupted.
Burday said he was concerned about the production of the documents, adding the Justice Department conceded it had not been processing the request despite agreeing to expedite it.
"We're talking about Roger Stone and potentially alleged illegal conduct related to the president and his campaign," Burday said, adding that "delay is a very real issue."
Moss said he was no longer concerned about past actions in the case and wanted to move it forward in accordance with FOIA law. Burday said an amended complaint would be filed by Thursday, and the judge set a hearing Monday to discuss a production schedule.
Leopold's FOIA request was filed after Main Justice intervened in the sentencing recommendation for Stone, a longtime associate of the president. A jury last year convicted Stone on all charges brought forward by Special Counsel Robert Mueller III, including lying to Congress and witness intimidation.
Stone has appealed his conviction, and is also asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to review his request for a new trial and delay his July 14 surrender date. The Justice Department is set to file a brief with the court on Stone's surrender date by noon Thursday.
Read more:
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 AllGC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-87
- 2The Key Moves in the Reshuffling German Legal Market as 2025 Dawns
- 3Social Media Celebrities Clash in $100M Lawsuit
- 4Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
- 5Trump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
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