Anonymous Treasury Department YouTuber Seeks to Block Government Request for Data
The self-described whistleblower asked a federal judge in Northern California to block a subpoena from Treasury's Inspector General's Office seeking to identify who posted a pair of YouTube videos criticizing the minority hiring and promotion practices of the Office of Financial Research.
March 28, 2018 at 05:54 PM
3 minute read
An anonymous Treasury Department employee has asked a federal judge in Northern California to block a government request for information from Google that could reveal his or her identity.
The Treasury Department's Inspector General's Office earlier this year subpoenaed Google for records related to two YouTube videos consisting primarily of text, which the anonymous employee claims to have posted. The videos assert that officials at the Office of Financial Research, or OFR, the Treasury unit created in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis to help forecast and anticipate financial storms, discriminated against minorities in hiring, pay and promotion, particularly African-Americans.
San Francisco's Kronenberger Rosenfeld filed a motion to quash the subpoena on Tuesday. The firm argues that their client, a current Treasury employee referred to simply as “Doe” or “Movant” in court documents, is a whistleblower whose rights are protected by the First Amendment and various statutes protecting government employees who report misconduct. The motion claims Doe raised issues such as age and race discrimination anonymously through internal Treasury Department channels, as well as to the EEOC, the Office of Special Counsel, and 15 members of Congress.
In lieu of an order fully blocking the subpoena, Doe's lawyers asked alternatively for a protective order shielding their client's identity from anyone besides “specified, responsible individuals” within the Inspector General's Office.
“While Movant may possess relevant information that Movant is willing to share to assist OIG in any legitimate investigation, Movant has genuine concerns that the disclosure of Movant's identity will result in retaliation, including the loss of Movant's employment,” Doe's lawyers wrote. Doe's lawyers also claim that while the Inspector General's Office is authorized to issue subpoenas as part of its role in investigating fraud and abuse at Treasury, the investigation here appears “to be pretext to identify Movant and retaliate.”
The Treasury Department deferred a request for comment to the Office of Inspector General. A spokesman for the office said in an email Wednesday afternoon it had been made aware of “potentially threatening situations at OFR.”
“We are responsible for investigating threats to the integrity of Treasury programs. Accordingly we are looking into potential threats. We cannot discuss further at this time,” the spokesman said.
Jeffrey Rosenfeld, one of Doe's lawyers, said that his client suspects that efforts to ferret out the YouTube poster's identity are likely tied to efforts from OFR officials to identify and punish anonymous sources in a recent Wall Street Journal article critical of the office's work. But, Rosenfeld pointed out, the partially redacted copy of the subpoena his client received from Google offers little insight to what the inspector general is investigating.
“We're a little surprised at the secretive nature of this subpoena. Our client has been complaining for a while and is willing to cooperate with any legitimate investigation,” Rosenfeld said. “We just don't think this effort is bona fide.”
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 AllContract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readSouthern California Law Firms Boast Industry-Leading Revenue, Demand Through Q3
Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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