Room Where It Happened, The: John Bolton’s Tell-All Book about Trump

June 19, 2020–A D.C. federal judge on Friday refused to halt the imminent release of John Bolton’s The Room Where It Happened. Instead, he’s taking the matter under submission and will make his final decision after an in-camera review of confidential information with DOJ lawyers.

The Trump Administration filed its lawsuit against Bolton on Tuesday and moved for a temporary restraining order on Thursday despite the fact that the book has already been sent to retailers around the nation, despite how many newspapers have already spilled the juiciest contents of the book in their own published stories, and despite Bolton pre-taping an interview with ABC News that is set to run this weekend.

The government’s complaint alleges that the book’s publication breaches Bolton’s confidentiality obligations as former National Security Advisor and that he is flouting a contract that requires him to submit material to the government for prepublication review.

That the government has the right to enforce secrecy agreements with officers who see classified information is confirmed by the Supreme Court’s 1980 decision in Snepp v. United States, but here, the question isn’t merely whether the government is likely to prove Bolton has breached security. (He argues that he spent months seeking prepublication clearance, that he was led to believe that the current iteration of his book contained no classified secrets, and that government’s attempt to block is pretextual.) A federal court also had to wrestle with an injunction that would act as a “prior restraint” on free speech. That evoked comparisons to the famous Pentagon Papers case from 1971.

The First Amendment implications in Trump’s attempt to block Bolton swiftly attracted interested third parties including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Association of American Publishers, PEN America, and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. In amicus briefs submitted shortly before today’s hearing, these groups sounded the alarm about the proposed restraint, which went as far as a demand that booksellers around the nation should also be subject.

U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth, who had quickly consented to a virtual hearing to entertain the motion for a restraining order, also had to wrestle with the question of whether the government could really show imminent harm given how the book’s eyewitness account of Trump’s fumbling and arguably corrupt dealings with foreign leaders had already reached the public sphere.

Lamberth began the hearing by acknowledging that. “The horse, as we used to say in Texas, seems to be out of the barn,” he said, before asking the DOJ what he can really do in this situation. David Morrell responded that the injunction isn’t an “all or nothing” request and there’s “massive government interest” in limiting further distribution and making sure the pre-publication requirement isn’t “willy-nilly breached by disgruntled authors.” He suggested Simon & Schuster could claw back the books from distributors and give them to the government and it could still be possible to prevent the distribution of electronic and audio copies.

One central issue is when some of the information the DOJ believes is classified was deemed as such and whether that happened after Ellen Knight, a senior director at the National Security Council, completed her review of Bolton’s book and found no classified information. Morrell said one example was classified after NCS’s Michael Ellis completed a second review (one Bolton says he wasn’t made aware of) and two other examples would require additional research.
Lamberth also asked whether Trump instructed officials to designate portions of the book as classified. Morrell said he hasn’t talked to the president and doesn’t know. He also defended that it was “entirely appropriate” for a second NSC official to conduct a review given that Bolton was National Security Advisor who is “providing details about ongoing policy matters during the same administration in which he served” and said “there are certain passages in his book that will damage the national security of the United States.”

Bolton’s lawyer Charles Cooper argued Lamberth is “utterly powerless” to do anything and this isn’t really a judicial proceeding. “It’s theater,” he said. “It’s to use your courtroom as a stage and enlist you as a player.”

Cooper argued Bolton fulfilled his contractual obligation and would have needed further written permission if Knight had found there to still be classified information in the final manuscript after making the author remove confidential, secret and top-secret information over four months of review. He noted that an amended complaint filed Friday morning takes the teeth out of his motion to dismiss, and he’ll refile as a summary judgment motion if he has to. Now there’s talk of sensitive compartmented information, or SCI, which was covered under a separate confidentiality contract and would require a written release before Bolton could publish.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter