In re: Application of the Committee on the Judiciary
In March 2019, Special Counsel Robert Mueller issued a detailed report of his investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and President Trump’s many efforts to obstruct that investigation. The version of the report that was released publicly and to Members of Congress, however, was significantly redacted. More specifically, several key portions of the report that referenced grand jury proceedings or materials were omitted pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e), which governs when and to whom grand jury materials may be disclosed. In July 2019, the House Judiciary Committee filed an application requesting that the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia release to the Committee those portions of the Report redacted as grand jury materials, as well as any underlying grand jury transcripts or exhibits that are referenced in the redacted portions of the report or that are related to actions of the President that the Committee is investigating. In August 2019, CAC filed a brief as amicus curiae in support of the Judiciary Committee’s request.
Our brief makes several points. First, the brief explains that the tradition of maintaining the secrecy of grand jury proceedings is not absolute, and courts have regularly disclosed grand jury materials in appropriate circumstances throughout American history. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, enacted in 1942, were intended to continue that tradition of allowing courts to disclose grand jury materials where appropriate. Among other things, those Rules allow courts to permit disclosure “preliminarily to or in connection with a judicial proceeding.” Second, the brief describes the long history of Congress receiving grand jury materials to further its impeachment and investigative functions, both before and after the Rules’ passage. Most importantly, a D.C. district court permitted a 1972 grand jury to draft a report detailing its investigation of President Nixon, and the court disclosed that report to Congress. The D.C. Circuit has twice affirmed this disclosure, recently explaining that a congressional impeachment investigation qualifies as a judicial proceeding under Rule 6(e). Third, the brief explains that the House Judiciary Committee is currently investigating whether to recommend President Trump’s impeachment, which qualifies as a judicial proceeding for purposes of Rule 6(e). Moreover, disclosure is warranted here given, among other things, the significance of Congress’s impeachment function and the importance of the Committee receiving these materials.
On October 25, the district court granted the Committee’s application and ordered the Department of Justice to disclose redacted portions of the Mueller Report and underlying grand jury materials. The Court held that it could disclose these materials under Rule 6(e) because the term “judicial proceeding” includes impeachment proceedings, and the House of Representatives is currently engaged in an impeachment inquiry.
August 30, 2019
CAC files an amicus curiae brief in district court on behalf of the Judiciary CommitteeD.D.C. Amicus Brief
October 8, 2019
The District Court hears oral arguments
October 25, 2019
The District Court issues its decisionD.D.C. Opinion
October 28, 2019
The Department of Justice (DOJ) appeals the case to the D.C. Circuit and files a motion for a stay pending appeal
November 1, 2019
CAC files an amicus brief in opposition to DOJ’s motion for a stayD.C. Cir. Amicus Br.
November 18, 2019
The D.C. Circuit hears oral arguments on the motion for a stay pending appeal and grants the stay
December 16, 2019
CAC files an amicus curiae brief in the D.C. Circuit on behalf of the Judiciary CommitteeD.C. Cir. Amicus Br.
January 3, 2020
The D.C. Circuit hears oral arguments on the merits