Skip to content
Foreclosure and Bankruptcy Lawyer Free Consultation in Astoria, NY
Menu
  • Property Tax
  • Judicial Foreclosure List
  • Wrongful Foreclosure
  • Judicial Foreclosure
  • Bankruptcy And Foreclosure
Menu

Lee v. Department of Justice (2005)

Posted on August 2, 2020August 11, 2020 by Robert Mayer

Wen Ho Lee, a scientist employed by the Department of Energy, was investigated on suspicion of espionage, a case that resulted in a plea agreement in which Lee pled guilty to one count of mishandling of classified computer files. Lee brought an action against the DOE, DOJ, and FBI, alleging the agencies improperly disclosed personal information about the investigation to the news media. Lee issued subpoenas to several journalists seeking testimony and documents relating to the leaks. The journalists moved to quash the subpoenas, which the district court denied. When the journalists had been deposed and refused to answer certain questions, the district court held them in contempt, which they appealed. The D.C. Circuit held that the journalists’ interest in protecting their sources was outweighed by Lee’s interest in compelling disclosure of the source of the leak, and thus the journalists’ failure to answer questions warranted a finding of civil contempt. The journalists sought rehearing en banc, which was denied.

Garland dissented from the denial of rehearing en banc. He started by noting that the Privacy Act is available not only to individuals; ostensibly, a former public official seeking to learn who leaked information that forced them to resign could use the Act to compel disclosure. Moreover, the “centrality” and “exhaustion” requirements of the Act would be satisfied in most cases. “[I]f the reporter’s privilege is limited to those requirements, it is effectively no privilege at all. Plaintiffs wielding Privacy Act suits will routinely succeed in putting reporters who receive whistleblower leaks to the choice of testifying or going to jail.” Garland cited Zerelli v. Smith, 656 F.2d 705 (D.C. Cir. 1981) for the proposition that the privilege should prevail in all but the most exceptional cases; the preferred position of the First Amendment and the importance of a vigorous press must be kept in mind. In determining claims under the Privacy Act, Garland would have weighed the public interest in protecting the reporter’s sources against the private interest in compelling disclosure.

Robert Mayer

Robert Mayer

Robert Mayer got the license to work as a lawyer in New-York in 2010. After graduating he worked in a non-governmental organization to the UN (United Nations), that specializes in studying the issue of population aging.Read more...

Recent Posts

  • 7 Best Online Bookkeeping Services in 2022
  • Possibility of using a Quitclaim Deed in NYC
  • Top 8 Best Bike Tours in New York City [My Experience]
  • How to Cash Out a Pre Foreclosure Home
  • Judicial Foreclosure Definition and Explanation

Foreclosure Help

  • 7 Best Online Bookkeeping Services in 2022
  • Possibility of using a Quitclaim Deed in NYC
  • Top 8 Best Bike Tours in New York City [My Experience]
  • How to Cash Out a Pre Foreclosure Home
  • Judicial Foreclosure Definition and Explanation

Foreclosure in Astoria, NY

  • About Robert Mayer
  • Bankruptcy And Foreclosure in NY | Can Bankruptcy Stop Foreclosure

This Website is for informational purposes only. The hiring of an attorney is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Materials on the website do not, and are not intended to, constitute legal advice. Neither transmission nor receipt of such materials will create an attorney-client relationship between the sender and receiver. Users are advised not to take, or refrain from taking, any action based upon materials in this Website without consulting legal counsel.

Merrick Garland Project © 2021 | Privacy Policy | Built using WordPress and Responsive Blogily theme by Superb