D.D.C.: SW affidavit unsealed in part, protects identity of witnesses

The search warrant for Sen. Burr’s cell phone is unsealed in part after about a year under the common law right of access to judicial records. In re L.A. Times Communs. LLC to Unseal Court Records, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154587 (D.D.C. Aug. 29, 2022), on remand from See L.A. Times Communs., LLC v. United States (In re L.A. Times Communs. LLC), 28 F.4th 292 (D.C. Cir. 2022):

In May 2021, this Court denied Los Angeles Times Communications LLC’s (“petitioner” or “L.A. Times”) application to unseal court records pertaining to what was then a hypothetical search warrant—the existence of which the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) had declined publicly to confirm—that allegedly had been executed on then-U.S. Senator Richard Burr’s cellphone a year earlier in connection with an insider-trading investigation. See In re L.A. Times Communs. LLC, No. 21-mc-16 (BAH), 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99766, 2021 WL 2143551, at 1 (D.D.C. May 26, 2021). The D.C. Circuit reversed the denial of petitioner’s application and remanded with instructions to reconsider whether, given new public disclosures by another government agency about the investigation after this Court’s decision had issued and “Senator Burr’s public acknowledgment of the Justice Department’s investigation,” unsealing of the still-hypothetical search warrant materials would be appropriate under the common law right of access to judicial records. See L.A. Times Communs., LLC v. United States (In re L.A. Times Communs. LLC), 28 F.4th 292, 295 (D.C. Cir. 2022).

. . .

For the foregoing reasons, DOJ’s proposed redactions in its latest proposed redacted version of the search warrant and supporting affidavit, ECF No. 34-1, are appropriate to protect third-party privacy interests—including private financial information of third parties; information gained from the cooperation of private third-party witnesses; and descriptions of the government’s law enforcement techniques and processes in the course of the investigation—and thus will be retained. DOJ’s proposed redactions intended to preserve the due process interests of investigative targets against whom the probable cause allegations in the warrant were made without any criminal charges being brought must be disclosed.

This entry was posted in Warrant papers. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.