Judge: White House
visitor logs
are public documents
From Bill Mears, CNN
from the Web, December 17, 2007
Story Highlights
* Judge: Secret Service-controlled log is public under Freedom of
Information Act
* White House battling suit alleging influence of conservative Christian
leaders
* Separate legal action finds convicted lobbyist visited White House
* Records have been a key investigative tool for advocacy groups and
Congress
WASHINGTON -- The White House
must release its visitor logs and cannot hide behind a shield of privilege, a
federal judge ruled Monday. The Bush administration has resisted public
disclosure while it fights a lawsuit over alleged political influence by
conservative Christian leaders.
U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth concluded the information is part of
the public record and is subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information
Act as "agency records."
"Because the Secret Service creates, uses and relies on, and stores visitor
records, they are under its control," said Lamberth.
He ordered the Secret Service to produce records within 20 days.
The White House claimed exclusive control of the documents, subject to the
complete discretion of the president over their release.
Secret Service records have been an important tool for advocacy groups and
members of Congress seeking information on the inner workings of the executive
branch.
Congressional investigators used the records a decade ago in their
investigations of the various Whitewater scandals involving President Clinton
and his associates, as well as allegations of influence peddling by the Clinton
campaign in the 1996 elections.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a self-described
government watchdog group, sought the visit records of prominent conservatives
James Dobson of Focus on the Family, Wendy Wright of Concerned Women of America
and seven others including the late televangelist Jerry Falwell.
"CREW is pleased that the judge saw through the White House's transparent
attempts to hide public documents from the American people," said Melanie Sloan,
the group's executive director. "We look forward to sharing the documents
we obtain through this lawsuit."
The White House and Justice Department had no immediate reaction to the ruling.
Separate legal action by CREW and other groups, including Judicial Watch and the
Washington Post, sought White House visitor logs that listed lobbyist Jack
Abramoff. He pleaded guilty last year to public corruption charges.
The White House and the Secret Service in 2006 signed an agreement that visitors
to the White House complex were not subject to public disclosure. That
"memorandum of understanding" was disclosed during legal action over the
Abramoff records.
Lamberth called that a "self-serving" agreement because it was issued after the
records were created and after the CREW lawsuit.
The judge, in a separate ruling Monday, said he lacked the authority to order
the Secret Service to stop destroying its visitor records once copies were
turned over to White House officials. But Lamberth noted the National
Archives had to approve any destruction of the logs.
Another federal judge in Washington ordered the release of Secret Service logs
of visitors to Vice President Dick Cheney's office. Cheney claimed those
logs were subject to executive privilege. That ruling is being appealed.
Lamberth noted the Secret Service has an important "protective mission" when
compiling electronic information -- including background checks -- of those
seeking to enter the White House complex. But he said the agency's claim
of "limited use" of the data does not mean the records are not subject to
judicial review.
"This does not mean the Secret Service does not read or rely on them," wrote
Lamberth. "If that were the case, any convenience store patron who has
ever bought a losing scratch ticket could claim they did not gamble simply
because they held the ticket for only a few minutes."
The issue of White House privilege over visitor logs has not been fully
addressed by the Supreme Court.
The case decided Monday is Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in
Washington v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
|
