by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack
DDC COURTHOUSE, June 28 – The US Department of Homeland Security has refused to grant expedited processing to a Freedom of Information Act request concerning their processing of a visa for Prince Harry and whether favoritism or politics were involved.
On June 6 District for the District of Columbia Judge Carl Nichols held oral argument. Inner City Press was there.
The Department of Justice, representing DHS, said among other things that only that it defined as mainstream media, limiting that term to the New York Times, Washington Post, WSJ and TV networks, can get expedited treatment.
Judge Nichols took the motion under advisement but asked DOJ to ask DHS, and report by email in a week, if it will agree to expedite or decide, to get to the merits of withholding the records, he said.
That answer, ironically, will not be public, the docket.
There was an argument about whether the allegation of government misconduct must be explicit - not unlike SDNY Judge Victor Marrero's recent decision that Inner City Press should have said "objection" rather than asking for the docket number and basis for sealing before being put out of a courtroom, to get review.
On June 14, the request for a preliminary injunction was withdrawn as moot, after DHS belatedly replied that "we can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any records relating to your request." DHS reply on Patreon here.
On June 28, Judge Nichols issued an order: "MINUTE ORDER. Before the Court in this Freedom of Information Act case are a Complaint and an Answer. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 16.3, the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) are inapplicable. It is hereby ORDERED that the Parties shall confer and file a Joint Status Report on or before July 7, 2023. The Joint Status Report shall address: (1) the status of Plaintiff's FOIA request; (2) the anticipated number of documents responsive to Plaintiff's FOIA request; (3) the anticipated dates for release of the documents requested by Plaintiff; (4) whether a motion for stay is likely under Open America v. Watergate Special Prosecution Force, 547 F.2d 605 (D.C. Cir. 1976); (5) the possibility of prioritizing documents responsive to Plaintiff's request and any discussions regarding whether Plaintiff's request can be narrowed; and (6) whether the Parties anticipate summary judgment briefing and, if so, a proposed briefing schedule. Signed by Judge Carl J. Nichols on June 28, 2023."
Inner City Press will remain on the cases.
More extra on Substack here
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.
Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
