Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsD.C. Circuit just called for a response to the petition for rehearing en banc in the McKeever case
BREAKING: The D.C. Circuit just called for a response to the petition for rehearing en banc in the McKeever case about grand jury disclosures.
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
For more on why this matters, read my latest in
https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2019/05/14/inherent-authority-to-inform-our-democracy/?slreturn=20190421203505
Congress has good arguments that it should be able to get the Mueller grand jury materials pursuant to that exception, but some commentators have argued that McKeever prevents Congress from getting these materials until theres a formal impeachment proceeding. And even if those commentators are wrong, McKeevers implications extend far beyond the big-ticket investigations of presidents and other federal officials who might be impeached. There are many cases where the public would benefit from disclosure of grand jury informationfor example, in an environmental or discrimination case, or in a case of historic significance. Prior to McKeever, district court judges had authority to disclose such materials; now, in the D.C. Circuit, they do not.
Fortunately, McKeever may not be around for long. McKeever filed a petition last week asking the full D.C. Circuit to hear the case and overturn the panel decision. This is the quintessential case where such review by a full court of appeals is appropriate because the panels decision not only conflicts with its prior decision in the Watergate case, but also because it conflicts with the decisions of other courts of appeals. That means that whether a district court can disclose grand jury material will turn, in part, on where in the country it sits. Theres no reason that the answer to such an important question should turn on geographic happenstance, which is why the existence of a conflict with other circuits is a prime reason why courts grant petitions like the one McKeever filed.
As McKeever said in his filing with the court, the question presented in this case is important because grand jury disclosures can vindicate important public value values of transparency and historical understanding, and they advance public confidence in the judicial system; its particularly important now. Hopefully, the full D.C. Circuit will take this opportunity to correct the three-judge panels mistake.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 701 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (7)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
D.C. Circuit just called for a response to the petition for rehearing en banc in the McKeever case (Original Post)
kpete
May 2019
OP
Glimmer of Hope
(5,823 posts)1. Why did the three judge panel rule incorrectly?
TomSlick
(11,100 posts)2. I'm trying to to read too much into this.
If thirty-odd years at the bar has taught me that it is a fraught activity to attempt to read the tea leaves in such orders.
Given the seriousness of this case, I would expect an en banc review. I am not convinced the order provides much guidance on how the court will rule. I recommend waiting and watching.