Paracha v. Bush ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                            UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
    UNITED ST/\ TES DISTRlCT COURT
    FOR TJ lE DlSTRJCT OF COLUMBIA
    )
    SAIFULLAH PARACHA .                                  )
    )
    Petitioner.                          )
    )
    V.                                   )                 Ci"il Ac tion No. 04-2022 (PLf)
    )
    DONALD J. TRUMP.~ al..                               )
    )
    Respondents.                         )
    ___ )
    MEMORANDUM OPINiON AND ORDER
    This matter is before the Court on respondents· October 21. 2019 mot ion to
    exclude 1wo documents fro m the disco,·ery obligations imposed by the Amended Case
    Msnogernent Order in this matl::r.         ~c;!::',   JJh No. 219: the Cour ·s May 30. 20 l 9 Memorandum
    Opinion and Scheduling Order.`` Dkt No. 51.5: and the Cour! ·s June l2. 20 19 Discovery
    Order. ill Dkt. No. 517. f{espondcnrs · classifi ed motion is ex pane. iv. ~amera. and under seal;
    it is n:: tl ec.:tcd in a nn! ice of fi ling on the public docket. See Dkt. No. 54 7. For the reasons
    described below. respondents' moti on is granted.
    Section l.D of the Case Management Order. as amended. imposes on respondents
    an ongoing obligation to disclose to petitioner all reasonably available e:xc ulpatory informa1ion:
    Section I.E. imposes obligations lo disclose certain other documents when requested by
    petitioner. ~ee Case Management Order. Dkt. No. 204. at 2-3: Amended Case Management
    Order. Dkt. No. 219.       at   2· ,: Order. Dkl. :--Jo. 308, at 3 4 (revising certain prnvisiom in the Case
    Management Order). llndc:r the Amended Case Managtment Order, respondents must provide
    1h-:se disclosures   to   pe titioner's appropriate ly cleared counsel even if the information is
    UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
    UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
    classiticd. There is one excepti on. set fo rth in Section !.F: "lf the gol.'ernment objects         10
    providing 1he petilio ner· s counsel wi1h the classified information, lhe government shall move for
    an exception to discl osure:· See Dkt No. 2 I9 at .l. The Court has granted respo ndents' two
    pre vio us~ filtH~ Secti on l. P mmions. $~'<;! DkL Nos. 524. 545 .
    fn the present Section 1.F u10 1im\ . re spondents seek addit ional except ions from
    disclosure with rc:s pccl to tv. .·o classitieid. at
    545: 
    and (3) that .. a[1ernatives to disc lo~ure would not effectively Sllbstimtl;! for unredacied
    access:· i_Q. a1 547 . The: materi alit y n:qu ire1ne n1 i'.-l met only for '"infonm11ion that is exculpatory.
    that undermines the re liability of other purporri.::dly ineulpatnry evidence.       Ot'   that names potenti al
    1
    UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
    UNCLASSIFIED/IfOR PUBLIC RELEASE
    witnesses capable of providing material evidence:·         lg. at 546.   In a previous Memorandum
    Opinion u 11 {he Case Management Order !lmt applies to this matter. Judge Hogau ru led tbat ..,he
    Al.Pd@ framework ... is applicabl634 F. Supp. 2d 17
    . 24 (D.D.C.
    2009).
    The Court has reviewed the complt:tc and t.m-redacted versions of both o f the
    documc nh al issue in the present rnotiou. respondcnls' arguments and supponing declarations.
    and the classified substitute tha1the resrondcnts have alread y prod uc..!d. The Coun finds that
    none of the d iJssiti cd infonnation frn m the documents that has been omi tted from the suhstitutt'
    provided to Mr. Pamella is mate rial or necessary for meaningful habeas review. and that
    disclos ing th e in form atio n cou!d imperil rhc nat ional securi ty of the United Stmes. The; Court
    fu rther linds that the d assifo:~d substitute that responJen~ have produced lo Mr. Paracha does
    provide a sufficient al ternative fo r   anof the relevan t and maiedal information in the two
    documents at issue in this motion. Uncicr the .1 .1 OdaJ:i standard. the government may not be
    compelled to produce the underl ying documents themselves. Se~ Motion ac 4. 8 (ident ifying the
    c.:lassifo:d docL1111enls with specificity). Accordingly. it is hcre b)·
    ORDERED that responden ts' October 21. 20 19 `` parte mot ion.         §f~   0kt. No.
    5.J?. is GRANTED: iilnd it is
    .,
    UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
    UNCLASSIFIE0//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
    FURTHER ORDERED !ha t respondent need not prod uce the two documents that
    arc tbe SLlbject of the motion.
    SO ORDERED.
    ,,.)          f'~
    _} a - 1 : . ~ ~ -
    r AUL L  FRI ED MAN
    United States Distri ct Juuge
    4
    UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
    

Document Info

Docket Number: Civil Action No. 2004-2022

Judges: Judge Paul L. Friedman

Filed Date: 11/20/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/20/2019