“A member of the public, appreciating that the Maxwell grand jury materials do not contribute anything to public knowledge, might conclude that the Government’s motion for their unsealing was aimed not at ‘transparency’ but at diversion — aimed not at full disclosure but at the illusion of such,” he wrote.
“Contrary to the Government’s depiction, the Maxwell grand jury testimony is not a matter of significant historical or public interest,” Engelmayer wrote. “Far from it. It consists of garden-variety summary testimony by two law enforcement agents.”
Engelmayer, in his decision Monday on the Maxwell-related transcripts, quoted a 1973 legal ruling, which said that “the policy that ‘proceedings before a grand jury shall generally remain secret’ is ‘older than our Nation itself.’ ”
There are a lot of policies older than the US that we’ve agreed are bad, that’s not a very good point in of itself. Appeal to tradition or whatever. Not saying there aren’t good reasons why that’s so, I’m saying the reasons should be the answer, which he might as well have said, but wasn’t in the article.
If they’re so boring, why not just release them?
There are a lot of policies older than the US that we’ve agreed are bad, that’s not a very good point in of itself. Appeal to tradition or whatever. Not saying there aren’t good reasons why that’s so, I’m saying the reasons should be the answer, which he might as well have said, but wasn’t in the article.