Transcript of document discussion
4 And I can assure you further that whatever
5 conclusions he has reached with respect to the
6 classification and necessary storage of the document would
7 only be reiterated by Department of Justice officials in
8 Washington once they review the document. However, if it
9 please the Court, I'll have that document reviewed by the
10 litigation security group as soon as I receive it to confirm
11 Mr. Borgen's determination.
12 Secondly, with respect to secure storage, I
13 understand Your Honor would acknowledge the plaintiffs'
14 objections. I would just observe, however, that the FBI is
15 a defendant in many cases and that doesn't make them
16 untrustworthy to hold documents in secure facilities, nor
17 does it alleviate the requirement that they be held in
18 secure facilities. We can provide some assurances to the
19 Court that even if it is held in a secure facility in
20 Portland, that would in no way prejudice the case because,
21 of course, the document can be filed in a closed envelope.
22 We could perhaps even make an arrangement where the Court
23 were to sign the seal on the document to determine if it's
24 been opened, would be an option as well, and I don't believe
25 there's any particular justification or any basis to their
12
1 objection that the FBI cannot be trusted in some way with
2 this document. There's going to be, I can assure the Court,
3 no alteration of it or anything that would diminish the
4 Court's ability to review the matter based on this document.
5 So – and the option of building a SCIF is, for
6 the Court, is quite plainly in our view a nonstarter because
7 those facilities cost thousands, if not millions, and take
8 months and months to create.
9 The option of redacting the document of classified
10 information is a viable option, but it would, of course,
11 involve blacking out large portions of the document, and I'm
12 not sure what purpose that ultimately serves. But we would
13 be happy to explore that option as well, Your Honor.
14 THE COURT: Well, the other option is to determine
15 if the originator of the document can declassify it or
16 reduce its classification.
17 MR. COPPOLINO: I can certainly make that inquiry
18 and report back to the Court on that, Your Honor but –
19 THE COURT: Doesn't Mr. Borgen – well, I
20 shouldn't say that. Mr. Borgen indicated that he could do
21 that.
22 MR. COPPOLINO: Right. I think that's not likely
23 to be a solution at this stage, Your Honor, without
24 redactions of the document to the point where the content
advertisement
