Epstein Secrets

ions. The procedure is mandatory and governs state and federal proceedings and has been upheld in the United States Supreme Court. See U.S. ex rel, Touhy v. Ragen 340 U.S. 462 (1951). In addition, the Privacy Act (Title 5, U.S.C., Section 552a(b), prohibits the release of agency records pertaining to

sions. The procedure is mandatory and governs state and federal proceedings and has been upheld in the United States Supreme Coutt, See U.S. a rel, Touhv, v. Ram 340 U.S. 462 (1951). In addition, the Privacy Act (Title 5, U.S.C., Section 552O), prohibits the release of agency records pertaining to an

/or NDGA. SDFLa and NDGA may say, pound sand, and if plaintiffs subpoena one or the other of those districts, then we see if the subpoenaed district Touhy-refers the subpoena to Geoff as the "responsible" USA, and take it from there. So I am OK with Steven's plan for dealing with plaintiff's further re

E: Jeffrey Epstein-Related Touhy Requests >; I have some hesitation on just referring them to NDGa for the SDFla investigative stuff. First, tinder Touhv section 16.22(6), the responsible USA is the USA for the district "where the issuing authority" is located. They actually have an action filed in t

s approach was reasonable, but I'll check with Sarah too. Overall, I don't think we have a ton of precedent for referring folks to another USAO on a Touhy, and certainly not to a third USAO in the referral context. Some information that might be useful in this that I don't have a complete understandin

tein-Related Touhy Requests (USANYS) ; <->; I have some hesitation on just referring them to NDGa for the SDFla investigative stuff. First, under Touhv section 16.22(b), the responsible USA is the USA for the district "where the issuing authority" is located. They actually have an action filed in t