In an appeal from a district court order granting an application by a newspaper to access sealed wiretap applications relating to the investigation of a prostitution ring, the order is reversed where: 1) petitioner did not show good cause to unseal the wiretap-related documents pursuant to Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968; and 2) petitioner did not have a First Amendment right to gain access to wiretap applications. (Amended opinion)
Read In the Matter of the App. of the N.Y. Times. Co. to Unseal Wiretap & Search Warrant Materials, No. 09-0854
Appellate Information
Argued: June 16, 2009
Decided: August 6, 2009
Amended: August 20, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Cabranes
Counsel
For Appellant:
Daniel L. Stein, Assistant United States Attorney
For Appellee:
David E. McCraw, The New York Times Company, Legal Department, New York, NY
Itai Maytal, The New York Times Company, Legal Department, New York, NY
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
