A three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled against former President Joe Biden’s effort to prevent the release of audio recordings and transcripts from interviews conducted with his memoir ghostwriter. The court suspended its decision until August 3 to allow Biden time to consider filing another appeal.
The majority opinion determined that public interest in disclosing the materials outweighs privacy concerns, particularly with redactions applied to protect personal information. The panel stated that “any remaining incursion on personal privacy from disclosure of the now-redacted materials likely does not outweigh the public interest in disclosure.” Judge Florence Pan dissented, arguing that Biden demonstrated a substantial privacy interest given that the conversations took place in his home during a criminal investigation that resulted in no charges.
The recordings came from interviews conducted by Mark Zwonitzer, who collaborated with Biden on memoirs published in 2007 and 2017. Zwonitzer interviewed Biden at his Delaware home in 2016 and 2017. Biden’s legal team contends the conversations were candid and personal in nature, intended to remain confidential. Biden’s spokesperson stated the former president “respects the courts and the vital role an independent judiciary plays in a healthy democracy” while disagreeing with the ruling.
Special counsel Robert Hur obtained the recordings during an investigation into Biden’s handling of classified documents. Republicans in Congress sought access to the material after Hur declined to file charges. Biden subsequently sued to prevent the Trump administration’s Justice Department from releasing the recordings to Congress and the Heritage Foundation. A federal district judge had previously ruled in June that public interest outweighed privacy rights. The dissenting judge suggested the majority’s denial of an injunction would effectively moot the case by allowing immediate disclosure.