718 F.3d 13
1st Cir.2013Background
- BC conducted the Belfast Project, compiling interviews about Northern Ireland conflict; materials are confidential and housed at Burns Library.
- US government sought McConville-related materials under the US-UK MLAT via August 2011 subpoena in District of Massachusetts.
- BC moved to quash to protect confidentiality; district court allowed in camera review and ordered 85 interviews produced.
- The district court’s Findings and Order listed materials by interviewee codes without explanation for each release.
- BC argued the district court abused discretion by releasing largely irrelevant materials; government argued courts have limited review under MLAT.
- This court previously addressed related proceedings in In re Dolours Price and now reviews discretion and relevancy standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court had discretion to quash or review the subpoena. | BC asserts district court discretion to quash and conduct in camera review. | United States contends MLAT limits court discretion; Attorney General controls process. | Yes, district court had discretion to review and enforce under MLAT. |
| What standard of relevancy applies to production of academic materials. | BC seeks direct relevance (heightened scrutiny) under In re Special Proceedings. | Government argues ordinary Branzburg relevance governs. | Ordinary relevance applies; Branzburg controls. |
| Whether the death of Dolours Price moots the appeal. | Price’s death moots the criminal aspects of Price’s matter. | Case concerns broader McConville investigation, not solely Price. | Mootness not applicable; case remains live for broader investigation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (U.S. 1972) (newsman privilege weighed against criminal investigation need)
- University of Pennsylvania v. EEOC, 493 U.S. 182 (U.S. 1990) (requires showing relevance for subpoenas, not highly particularized relevance)
- In re Special Proceedings, 373 F.3d 37 (1st Cir. 2004) (recognizes heightened sensitivity balancing for confidential sources)
- In re Dolours Price, 685 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2012) (balances government interests with confidentiality; Branzburg controlling)
- In re 840 140th Ave. NE, 634 F.3d 557 (9th Cir. 2011) (discusses separation of powers in MLAT subpoena enforcement)