Legal Doc: Motion for Reconsideration of Court Order [Re: Secret Docs]

Legal Doc: Motion for Reconsideration of Court Order [Re: Secret Docs]


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v
JONATHAN J. POLLARD,
Defendant

Criminal No. 86-0207 (NHJ)

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
AND MODIFICATION OF THE COURT'S JANUARY 12, 2001 ORDER

Defendant Jonathan J. Pollard, by his undersigned attorneys, moves for reconsideration and modification of the Court's January 12, 2001 order (the "Order") which denied Defendant's Emergency Motion to Add to List of Defense Counsel Authorized to Access Sealed Docket Materials Pursuant to Protective Order.

The Motion sought to provide Mr. Pollard's counsel, Eliot Lauer, access to five specified documents presently under seal in the Court's docket. Mr. Lauer is a member of the bar of this Court and the holder of a "Top Secret" security clearance issued by the government on November 2, 2000 for the specific purpose of enabling Mr. Lauer to represent Mr. Pollard.

The five documents were listed in the motion papers. Copies of the publicly available, redacted versions of the documents were handed up to the Court at oral argument on January 11, 2001.

The documents are:

For purposes of this motion, each redacted portion of Exhibits A through E has now been marked individually by hand with the designations "R1" through "R 88." Based upon the size of the redactions, it appears that certain redactions are as short as a single word or phrase (e.g., Ex. A: R13, R 22, R 29, R 32, R 36, R 44, R 45, R 46, R 50), while other redactions go on for several pages (e.g., Ex. A: R 11, R 17, R 27).

In the Order, the Court stated:

The Court has viewed the classified materials and finds that the exceptionally grave concern over national security is warranted. These documents contain information that if disclosed, even accidentally, would pose a grave risk to national security.

(Order at p. 3)

We respectfully submit that even if some portions of some of these 88 redacted passages contain information that, if disclosed, would pose a grave risk to national security, surely that description cannot apply literally to each and every redacted passage, or to each and every sentence within each redacted passage.

Accordingly, we respectfully ask the Court to provide access to security-cleared counsel at least to those redacted passages, or to those sentences within redacted passages, that do not contain information that, if disclosed, would pose a grave risk to national security. We request that the Court conduct a hearing at which the Court Security Officer would testify as to which redacted passages, and which sentences within redacted passages, contain such information and which do not.

We also address at this time any possible argument of mootness. As of the date of this motion, President Clinton has not announced any decision whether or not to grant clemency to Mr. Pollard. In the event the President grants clemency, this motion will become moot. In the event the President denies clemency, counsel will continue to require access to the sealed materials in connection with contemplated future applications for executive clemency. As a result, in the event President Clinton leaves office without having granted clemency to Mr. Pollard, this motion will not become moot.

Finally, we respectfully request that the Court waive the requirement of the Local Rules that a memorandum of law be submitted herewith.

Dated: January 18, 2001

Respectfully submitted,

CURTIS, MALLET-PREVOST,
COLT & MOSLE LLP

________________________________________
Jacques Semmelman
(Admitted pro hac vice)
Eliot Lauer (D.C. Bar No. 203786)

1801 K Street, N.W.
Suite 1205L
Washington, D.C. 20006
(202) 452-7373

-and-

101 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10178-0061
(212) 696-6000

Attorneys for Jonathan Jay Pollard


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v
JONATHAN J. POLLARD,
Defendant

Criminal No. 86-0207 (NHJ)

ORDER

Upon consideration of Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration and Modification of the Court's January 12, 2001 Order, it is by the Court this ____ day of ____________, 2001,

ORDERED, that the Motion is granted; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Court Security Officer is directed to appear before the Court for an evidentiary hearing, to be held ______________, 2001, at which the Court Security Officer will testify as to precisely which redacted passages, and which sentences within redacted passages, contain information that, if disclosed, would pose a grave risk to national security; and it is further

ORDERED, that the requirement in the Local Rules of filing a memorandum of law is hereby waived.

Dated:________________, 2001

_____________________________________
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

CATHERINE LEONARD certifies as follows under penalty of perjury:

On January ___, 2001, I caused to be served by hand delivery a true copy of the foregoing Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration and Modification of the Court's January 12, 2001 Order on:

Ronald Walutes, Esq.
Office of the United States Attorney
Transnational/Major Crimes Section
555 Fourth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001

___________________________________
Catherine Leonard


See Also:
Legal Doc: Court Decision - Pollard's Security-Cleared Counsel Denied Access to the Secret Docket
The Court Case 2000 Page

Return to home page