You are on page 1of 38

Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 1 of 38

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)
NATIONAL LEGAL AND POLICY CENTER )
107 Park Washington Court )
Falls Church, Virginia 22046 )
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action No. _______________
v. )
)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE )
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW )
Washington, DC 20530 )
Defendant. )
)

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Plaintiff, NATIONAL LEGAL AND POLICY CENTER (NLPC), by undersigned

counsel, hereby files this Complaint to seek declaratory and injunctive relief, to compel

compliance with the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (“FOIA”), and to enjoin

Defendant from withholding from disclosure certain records within the possession and control of

Defendant UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (“DOJ”).

Among other documents, NLPC seeks disclosure of a withheld two-page agency

memorandum that formed the basis of granting a retroactive ethics waiver to Special Counsel

Robert S. Mueller, III, on May 18, 2017, the day after his appointment on May 17, 2017, which

was the day after he was interviewed by President Donald J. Trump on May 16, 2017, for the

position of the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Because the President, the U.S.

House of Representatives, and the public have called for the release of the confidential “Mueller

Report” (and the Attorney General is preparing to disclose a redacted version on April 18, 2019),

the two-page memorandum justifying an ethics waiver to Special Counsel Mueller should be

immediately released as well as a matter of law and policy.


1
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 2 of 38

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) (FOIA) and 28 U.S.C.

§ 1331 (Federal question jurisdiction), 2201, and 2202 (Declaratory Judgment Act).

2. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to Court pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552 (a)(4)(B)

and 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e).

PARTIES

3. Plaintiff NLPC is a national nonprofit 501(c)(3) public interest organization that

promotes ethics in public life through research, investigation, education, and legal action. See

generally www.nlpc.org.

4. Defendant DOJ is an agency of the United States government, headquartered in

Washington, D.C. It has in its possession, custody and control, records to which plaintiff seeks

access.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Plaintiff’s September 4, 2018 FOIA Request

5. On September 4, 2018, Plaintiff NLPC submitted a FOIA Request to DOJ requesting

all records regarding the May 17, 2017, appointment of Robert S. Mueller, III, to be Special

Counsel by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein under the Special Counsel regulations,

particularly relating to a “detailed review of ethics and conflicts of interest issues” required by 28

C.F.R. 600.3(b). In addition, NLPC requested that the FOIA request be processed on an

expedited basis as required by DOJ’s FOIA regulation, 28 C.F.R. 16.5(e)(iv), which provides for

expedited treatment if the matter is “of widespread and exceptional media interest in which there

exists possible questions about the government’s integrity that affect public confidence.” See

Exhibit 1 incorporated herein by reference.


2
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 3 of 38

6. On September 13, 2018, NLPC received a response from DOJ’s Office of Information

and Policy acknowledging receipt of the FOIA request, summarily denied the request for

expedited processing without stating any reasons, assigned the request to DOJ’s “complex track”

for processing, and forwarded parts of the request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

and the Justice Management Division (JMD). See Exhibit 2 incorporated herein by reference.

7. On September 14, 2018, NLPC filed an immediate appeal of the denial for expedited

treatment of the FOIA request stating that it was arbitrary and capricious since there was no

reason given for the denial. See Exhibit 3 incorporated herein by reference.

8. On December 21, 2018, Arthur Gary, the General Counsel of the JMD, responded to

that part of the September 4, 2018 FOIA request for documents regarding Mr. Mueller’s ethics

review, and disclosed a one-sentence Authorization by Associate Deputy Attorney General Scott

Schools dated May 18, 2017, the day after Mr. Mueller’s appointment, giving Mr. Mueller an

ethics waiver under 5 CFR 2635.502(d). However, Mr. Gary withheld from disclosure the two-

page recommendation memorandum in full under FOIA Exemption 5, the deliberative process

privilege. Mr. Gary further advised that an administrative appeal of his decision may be

appealed within 90 days. See Exhibit 4 incorporated herein by reference.

9. On January 14, 2019, NLPC filed a five-page administrative appeal from that part of

the response to the initial FOIA request by JMD that withheld the two-page memorandum

recommending an ethics waiver to Special Counsel Mueller. See Exhibit 5 incorporated herein

by reference.

10. NLPCs administrative appeal noted that press accounts raised possible conflicts with

Mr. Mueller’s association with his law firm that also represented the President’s son-in-law Jared

Kushner and Paul Manafort. Other possible conflicts included an alleged membership dispute

3
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 4 of 38

between Mr. Mueller and one of President Trump’s Golf Clubs in Virginia to which Mr. Mueller

had belonged. Exhibit 5 at 2. In addition, Mr. Mueller was interviewed by President Trump on

May 16 but was not hired, yet was promptly appointed the very next day which both he and Mr.

Rosenstein likely had already agreed to do. Id.

11. NLPC also noted in its appeal that there was a possible conflict by Mr. Rosenstein

himself, in that his recommendation on May 9, 2017, to fire then-FBI Director James Comey for

his mishandling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation was used as a pretext by the President

for firing Mr. Comey. Mr. Rosenstein was reported in the New York Times to be “shaken” and

very upset for being used in this fashion. Id. at 3.

12. The ethics waiver exemption granted to Mr. Mueller on May 18, 2017

(Authorization), could only be granted under DOJ regulations if there was a finding that his

participation in the Russia election interference investigation “would raise a question in the mind

of a reasonable person about his impartiality” 28 C.F.R. 2635.502(d).

13. According to the regulation cited in the Authorization, 28 C.F.R. 2635,502(d), the

grounds for granting a waiver to Mr. Mueller’s questionable impartiality may be based on one or

more of the following circumstances:

(1) The nature of the relationship involved;

(2) The effect that resolution of the matter would have upon the financial interests of the
person involved in the relationship;

(3) The nature and importance of the employee’s role in the matter, including the extent
to which the employee is called upon to exercise discretion in the matter;

(4) The sensitivity of the matter;

(5) The difficulty of reassigning the matter to another employee; and

4
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 5 of 38

(6) Adjustments that may be made in the employee’s duties that would reduce or
eliminate the likelihood that a reasonable person would question the employee's
impartiality.

Id.

14. Because the two-page recommendation memorandum justifying the ethics waiver

was withheld in its entirety, the public does not know which of one or more of the six reasons

were invoked to authorize Mr. Mueller’s conflicts waiver.

15. The reason or reasons for granting the waiver are inexplicable due to Mr.

Rosenstein’s testimony before Congress on June 28, 2018, regarding any conflict that Robert

Mueller may have had to justify the waiver:

“If there were any conflicts of interest that were brought to our attention, I would discuss
with Mr. Mueller, and then there could be review within the department, if there were a
credible allegation of a conflict of interest . . . . And so I'm not aware of any
disqualifying conflict of interest."

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-trump-claims-nasty-contentious-relationship-mueller-
amounts/story?id=56914885 (emphasis added). See Exhibit 5 at 3.

In fact, there was a review within the department because there was a reasonable question

of Mr. Mueller’s impartiality for which a waiver was sought and granted under the ethics

regulation.

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

COUNT I
(Failure to Expedite FOIA Request)

20. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1 to 19 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

21. The denial by DOJ to expedite Plaintiff’s FOIA request was per se arbitrary,

capricious, and contrary to law because no reason was given for the denial. 5 U.S.C. § 552

(a)(6)(E)(iii), “Agency action to deny… a request for expedited processing pursuant to this

subparagraph…shall be subject to judicial review....”


5
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 6 of 38

COUNT II
(Failure to Produce Records)

22. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1 to 21 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

23. Even if DOJ correctly denied expedited treatment, the records requested have not

been produced as of this date in violation of FOIA’s normal processing time requirements of 20

business days. If there are “unusual circumstances,” an agency may extend the time limit by no

more than ten working days. Placing NLPC‘s request on the “complex” track for processing was

arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable, particularly where the documents requested are small in

number, clearly identifiable, of recent vintage, and easily located. The continued failure to

produce the non-exempt records requested for over six months grossly violates the time

requirements of 5 U.S.C. § 552 (a)(6)(A)(ii) to provide the documents within the maximum

allowed of 30 business days and is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion and contrary to

law. NLPC has constructively exhausted its administrative remedies and is entitled to file this

action.

COUNT III

(Failure to Produce Mueller’s Ethics Waiver Memorandum)

24. The DOJ response from its JMD on December 21, 2018 (Exhibit 4) to withhold the

entire two-page memorandum recommending that Special Counsel Mueller be granted an ethics

waiver under Exemption 5 of FOIA is arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law as further

demonstrated in NLPC’s January 14, 2019, five-page appeal attached hereto as Exhibit 5 and

incorporated herein.

6
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 7 of 38

COUNT IV

(Failure to Respond to NLPC’s Administrative Appeal)

23. Under the provisions of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (a)(6)(A)(ii), DOJ had 20 days to

respond to NLPC’s January 14, 2019, appeal of the decision to withhold the two-page

memorandum recommending that Special Counsel Mueller be granted an ethics waiver..

23. As of this date, it has been over 90 days since the appeal has been filed and DOJ’s

has yet to respond to NLPC’s appeal other than to acknowledge that it was submitted. DOJ’s

failure to timely respond to the Plaintiff’s appeal violates 5 U.S.C. § 552 (a)(6)(A)(ii), and

therefore, Plaintiff has constructively exhausted its administrative remedies and is entitled to file

this action.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in its favor

and:

(1) Declare that Defendant’s failure to expedite Plaintiff’s September 14, 2018, FOIA

request was unlawful;

(2) Declare that Defendant’s failure to respond to Plaintiff’s FOIA request and produce

the records requested was unlawful;

(3) Declare that Defendant’s failure to produce the two-page memorandum justifying

Mr. Mueller’s ethics waiver was unlawful;

(4) Declare that Defendant’s failure to timely process Plaintiff’s administrative appeal of

the withholding of the two-page memorandum was unlawful.

(5) Enjoin Defendant from continuing to withhold non-exempt records responsive to

Plaintiff’s FOIA request.


7
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 8 of 38

(6) Order Defendant immediately to produce all responsive records improperly withheld

from Plaintiff without further delay or charge, including the two-page memorandum;

(7) Award Plaintiff attorney fees, and other litigation costs reasonably incurred in this

action pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B); and

(8) Grant such other relief as may be necessary and appropriate, or as the Court deems

just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

April 17, 2019 /s/Paul D. Kamenar


Paul D. Kamenar
DC Bar No. 914200
1629 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006
301-257-9435
paul.kamenar@gmail.com

Counsel for Plaintiff NLPC

8
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 9 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 10 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 11 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 12 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 13 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 14 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 15 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 16 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 17 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 18 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 19 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 20 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 21 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 22 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 23 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 24 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 25 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 26 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 27 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 28 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 29 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 30 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 31 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 32 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 33 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 34 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 35 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 36 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 37 of 38
Case 1:19-cv-01086 Document 1 Filed 04/17/19 Page 38 of 38