Judge won't unseal details of Trump's privilege fight over Jan. 6 grand jury

[brooklynite]

Source: Politico

A federal judge has rejected a bid by two news outlets to obtain access to details of former President Donald Trump’s efforts to block testimony by aides to a grand jury investigating his effort to derail the transfer of power after the 2020 election.

In a ruling on Thursday, Chief Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court in Washington said a federal court rule mandating grand jury secrecy precluded the release of court opinions and other filings about disputes she has ruled on behind closed doors.

“Accordingly, [the grand jury secrecy rule] does not permit such disclosure, at least for now and perhaps forever, and so petitioners’ applications are denied,” Howell wrote in a 32-page opinion.

POLITICO and The New York Times had both petitioned Howell to unseal portions of the grand jury proceedings in October, citing the historic nature of the secret rulings she had issued. The Justice Department opposed the unsealing, prompting Howell’s decision.

Read more: https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/23/judge-wont-unseal-trump-jan6-details-00084283

[Joinfortmill]

1. Interesting

[Bernardo de La Paz]

2. Seems like standard rule of law, but when the rump is charged, I think it should be unsealed

The standard is that a person has no way to defend themselves against grand jury presentations, so allegations and assertions made in one are kept secret.

But if a person is charged, then the charging information is released and that would overlap some GJ testimony/disputes. At that point, the person (assumed innocent at that point) is guaranteed a chance to defend themselves in courts, so the prohibition can be removed.

But if they are never charged, it basically remains sealed. Hence Judge Howell's statement "for now and perhaps forever".

Seems fairly cut and dried, not a lot of wiggle room.

[republianmushroom]

3. 25 months and counting