Epstein Secrets

tuart, 427 U.S. 539, 565 (1976)). Nor is withholding the records the only measure that courts can use to mitigate the adverse effects of publicity. Neb. Press Ass 'n, 427 U.S. at 563-64 (enumerating methods to mitigate the effect of pre- trial publicity including: "change of [a trial] venue," "postponement of the

foreseeable harm standard. Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 375 F. Supp. 3d 93, 100 (D.D.C. 2019); see also N.Y. Times Co v. Dep't of Health and Human Sews., 2021 U.S. Dist. Lexis 6267, at *30-31 (S.D.N.Y. Jan 13, 2021). That is the exact justification the Government offers. (See, e.g„ Christenson Decl.

tuart, 427 U.S. 539, 565 (1976)). Nor is withholding the records the only measure that courts can use to mitigate the adverse effects of publicity. Neb. Press Ass 'n, 427 U.S. at 563-64 (enumerating methods to mitigate the effect of pre- trial publicity including: "change of [a trial] venue," "postponement of the

foreseeable harm standard. Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 375 F. Supp. 3d 93, 100 (D.D.C. 2019); see also N.Y. Times Co v. Dep't of Health and Human Sews., 2021 U.S. Dist. Lexis 6267, at *30-31 (S.D.N.Y. Jan 13, 2021). That is the exact justification the Government offers. (See, e.g„ Christenson Decl.

tuart, 427 U.S. 539, 565 (1976)). Nor is withholding the records the only measure that courts can use to mitigate the adverse effects of publicity. Neb. Press Ass 'n, 427 U.S. at 563-64 (enumerating methods to mitigate the effect of pre- trial publicity including: "change of [a trial] venue," "postponement of the

foreseeable harm standard. Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 375 F. Supp. 3d 93, 100 (D.D.C. 2019); see also N.Y. Times Co v. Dep't of Health and Human Sews., 2021 U.S. Dist. Lexis 6267, at *30-31 (S.D.N.Y. Jan 13, 2021). That is the exact justification the Government offers. (See, e.g„ Christenson Decl.