55 Cited authorities

United States v. Nixon
418 U.S. 683 (1974) Cited 4,087 times 15 Legal Analyses
Holding appeal of District Court's denial of motion to quash subpoena duces tecum was in the Court of Appeals for purposes of § 1254
Department of Interior v. Klamath Water Users Prot. A.
532 U.S. 1 (2001) Cited 1,008 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the determination that records are not inter- or intra-agency "rules out any application of Exemption 5"
Nixon v. Administrator of General Services
433 U.S. 425 (1977) Cited 1,093 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act was not an unconstitutional bill of attainder because former President Nixon "constituted a legitimate class of one"
Morley v. Central Intelligence Agency
508 F.3d 1108 (D.C. Cir. 2007) Cited 627 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding CIA clearance and investigatory processes and related law enforcement techniques and procedures exempt under Exemption 7(E)
Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund
421 U.S. 491 (1975) Cited 466 times
Holding that the Speech or Debate Clause barred the plaintiffs' claims, premised on the plaintiffs' allegations that a Senate subcommittee subpoena, if complied with, would constitute an invasion of the plaintiffs' privacy and violate their First Amendment rights
Hannah v. Larche
363 U.S. 420 (1960) Cited 658 times
Holding that the Sixth Amendment "is specifically limited to 'criminal prosecutions'"
Coastal States Gas Corp. v. Dept. of Energy
617 F.2d 854 (D.C. Cir. 1980) Cited 1,183 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that when agency auditors communicate information from third parties to the agency's regional counsel and ask for legal advice, the regional counsel's written responses containing "neutral, objective analyses of agency regulations" are not privileged
Mead Data Cent., v. U.S. Dept. of Air Force
566 F.2d 242 (D.C. Cir. 1977) Cited 1,201 times
Holding that attorney-client privilege is consistent with exemption contained in section 552(b) of the FOIA
United States v. Morgan
313 U.S. 409 (1941) Cited 841 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Secretary of Agriculture should not have been ordered to testify "regarding the process by which he reached the conclusions of his [stockyard market rate-setting] order, including the manner and extent of his study of the record and his consultation with subordinates"
In re Sealed Case
116 F.3d 550 (D.C. Cir. 1997) Cited 425 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the government bears the burden of proving executive privilege applies to communications involving "dual hat" presidential advisors
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,681 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Rule 45 - Subpoena
Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 Cited 16,526 times 105 Legal Analyses
Holding that a subpoena may command a person to attend a trial, hearing, or deposition "within 100 miles of where the person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person"
Section 552 - Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings
5 U.S.C. § 552 Cited 12,169 times 556 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Court's entering of a “Stipulation and Order” approving the parties' terms of dismissal did not amount to a “court-ordered consent decree” that would render the plaintiff the prevailing party
Section 2516 - Authorization for interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications
18 U.S.C. § 2516 Cited 838 times 2 Legal Analyses
Listing the executive officers who may authorize a wiretap application
Section 1505 - Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
18 U.S.C. § 1505 Cited 603 times 20 Legal Analyses
Providing criminal punishment for person who corruptly obstructs or endeavors to obstruct "due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States"
Section 194 - Certification of failure to testify or produce; grand jury action
2 U.S.C. § 194 Cited 23 times
Whenever a witness summoned as mentioned in section 192 of this title fails to appear to testify or fails to produce any books, papers, records, or documents, as required, or whenever any witness so summoned refuses to answer any question pertinent to the subject under inquiry before either House, or any joint committee established by a joint or concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress, or any committee or subcommittee of either House of Congress, and the fact of such failure or failures
Section 190d - Legislative review by standing committees of the Senate and the House of Representatives
2 U.S.C. § 190d Cited 1 times
(a) Scope of assistance In order to assist the Congress in- (1) its analysis, appraisal, and evaluation of the application, administration, and execution of the laws enacted by the Congress, and (2) its formulation, consideration, and enactment of such modifications of or changes in those laws, and of such additional legislation, as may be necessary or appropriate, each standing committee of the Senate 1 and the House of Representatives shall review and study, on a continuing basis, the application

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, United States House of Representatives v. Lynch

55 Cited authorities

Holding appeal of District Court's denial of motion to quash subpoena duces tecum was in the Court of Appeals for purposes of § 1254

Holding that the determination that records are not inter- or intra-agency "rules out any application of Exemption 5"

Holding that the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act was not an unconstitutional bill of attainder because former President Nixon "constituted a legitimate class of one"

Holding CIA clearance and investigatory processes and related law enforcement techniques and procedures exempt under Exemption 7(E)

Holding that the Speech or Debate Clause barred the plaintiffs' claims, premised on the plaintiffs' allegations that a Senate subcommittee subpoena, if complied with, would constitute an invasion of the plaintiffs' privacy and violate their First Amendment rights

Holding that the Sixth Amendment "is specifically limited to 'criminal prosecutions'"

Holding that when agency auditors communicate information from third parties to the agency's regional counsel and ask for legal advice, the regional counsel's written responses containing "neutral, objective analyses of agency regulations" are not privileged

Holding that attorney-client privilege is consistent with exemption contained in section 552(b) of the FOIA

Holding that the Secretary of Agriculture should not have been ordered to testify "regarding the process by which he reached the conclusions of his [stockyard market rate-setting] order, including the manner and extent of his study of the record and his consultation with subordinates"

Holding that the government bears the burden of proving executive privilege applies to communications involving "dual hat" presidential advisors

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Holding that a subpoena may command a person to attend a trial, hearing, or deposition "within 100 miles of where the person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person"

Holding that the Court's entering of a “Stipulation and Order” approving the parties' terms of dismissal did not amount to a “court-ordered consent decree” that would render the plaintiff the prevailing party

Listing the executive officers who may authorize a wiretap application

Providing criminal punishment for person who corruptly obstructs or endeavors to obstruct "due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States"