Department of Justice Delivers $25,000 in Attorney Fees and Court Costs
(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has received a $25,000 award of attorney’s fees and costs from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in final settlement of Judicial Watch’s “Pardongate” lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Judicial Watch received the award on November 21, 2006 to compensate the nonprofit educational organization for its attorney time and expense in challenging DOJ’s improper withholding of records regarding former President Clinton’s controversial, last-minute pardons.
In the last days of his presidency, former President Clinton granted 140 pardons and commuted 36 sentences. The pardons were for individuals who had paid large fees to Clinton associates. Denise Rich donated more than $1 million to Democratic Party causes and the Clinton Library before her former husband, Marc Rich, received a presidential pardon. Hugh Rodham, brother of Hillary Rodham Clinton, accepted $400,000 after successfully lobbying his brother-in-law for clemency for two felons. (Anthony Rodham, Hillary’s other brother, has also been accused of illicitly brokering another pardon deal. Judicial Watch recently filed a formal complaint with the Justice Department in the matter.)
Judicial Watch served a FOIA request on DOJ in January 2001 seeking records regarding the controversial pardons. After DOJ refused to release the records, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia entered judgment in DOJ’s favor, finding that many records from the Office of the Pardon Attorney were subject to executive privilege. Judicial Watch successfully appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of the District of Columbia Circuit, which ruled in May 2004 that DOJ’s withholding of the Pardon Attorney’s records based on a claim of executive privilege “would be both contrary to executive privilege precedent and considerably undermine the purposes of FOIA to foster openness and accountability in government.”
The appellate court added that extending executive privilege in the manner advanced by DOJ “would have far-reaching implications for the entire executive branch that would seriously impede the operation and scope and of FOIA.” As a result of the appellate court’s ruling, over one thousand pages of responsive records were produced to Judicial Watch, although some records were redacted heavily.
In August 2006, Judicial Watch filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs in the lower court, arguing that it has substantially prevailed in the litigation and that DOJ’s improper withholding of records forced Judicial Watch to litigate the matter for more than five years. In September 2006, DOJ agreed to pay $25,000 to Judicial Watch to settle the matter.
“The outcome of this Clinton pardons FOIA case is a victory for transparency in government and a blow against corruption and the appearance of corruption,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The settlement recognizes the efforts of Judicial Watch’s tenacious lawyers in this long-fought legal battle.”
Click here to review Judicial Watch’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs.
Click here to learn more about the JW Pardongate Lawsuit