Full story
D.C. Circuit allows release
A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected Joe Biden’s bid to block the release of audio recordings and transcripts of his interviews with memoir ghostwriter Mark Zwonitzer, and it suspended the decision until Aug. 3 to allow more time for Biden to consider another appeal.
The panel said there is a “substantial” public interest in disclosing the material Biden wanted to keep under wraps, and it found that redactions would help protect Biden’s privacy.
The recordings stem from interviews conducted by Zwonitzer at Biden’s home in 2016 and 2017, and they were obtained by special counsel Robert Hur as part of an investigation into Biden’s handling of classified documents.
The Center Square reported that Biden has until Aug. 3 to prevent the release of documents at the U.S. Supreme Court, after a 2-1 ruling late Monday found substantial public interest in releasing the recordings and transcripts.
The Center Square also reported that Hur obtained the audio taken from 2016 and 2017, and that charges were ultimately never brought against Biden by the special counsel.
Privacy fight and dissent
Judge Florence Pan, who was nominated by Biden, dissented and argued that Biden has a “substantial privacy interest” in keeping the material hidden because the conversations took place in Biden’s home and the recordings were obtained during a criminal investigation that did not lead to an indictment.
In the AP account, Pan wrote that “The conversations at issue took place in Biden’s home, and the recordings of them were obtained by the government in the course of a criminal investigation that did not lead to an indictment,” framing the privacy concern as tied to the lack of an indictment.
The majority, as quoted by AP, concluded that “any remaining incursion on personal privacy from disclosure of the now-redacted materials likely does not outweigh the public interest in disclosure,” and it noted that redactions would protect privacy.
The San Joaquin Valley Sun similarly described the majority opinion as stating that redactions would help protect Biden’s privacy, while remaining privacy concerns were outweighed by public interest.
The San Joaquin Valley Sun also said the decision was suspended until August 3, giving Biden time to consider another appeal.
Heritage, Hur, and next steps
The Heritage Foundation originally requested the transcripts through a Freedom of Information Act request, and The Center Square reported that Kevin Roberts, president of Heritage, celebrated the decision with the message “Transparency is coming, not a moment too soon.”
The Center Square said Biden has until Aug. 3 to prevent the release of documents at the U.S. Supreme Court, and it reported that Biden’s lawyers could file a petition to the Supreme Court to seek an injunction against the audio and transcript release.
AP reported that Republicans in Congress demanded the material after Hur declined to file charges against the then-president, and it said Biden sued to seek an injunction to prevent the Justice Department under Trump from releasing the recordings to Congress and the Heritage Foundation.
AP also reported that the appeal was heard by D.C. Circuit Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan and Judge Gregory Katsas, and it said Srinivasan was nominated by President Barack Obama while Katsas was nominated by President Donald Trump.
CNN added that the recordings are of Biden speaking to his ghostwriter for his memoir, “Promise Me, Dad,” and that the Justice Department decided it no longer opposed releasing the tapes after Donald Trump became president, prompting Biden to sue.
