Th e Court a g re e s w ithJudg e B ate s th at a lth ou gh p e tit ion e r’ s mo tio n s e e ks a “ ‘r ule to 1 show ca use[,] ’ . . . [t] he motion more prope rly seeks a n ‘orde r to show ca

use.’” Ab du l H

am id A lGh izzawi , 05-2378, Orde r [266] (D.D.C. Sept. 24, 2009) (B ates, J.). UNITED STAT ES DIS TRICT COURT F OR THE D ISTRIC T OFCO LU M BIA

____________________________________) ABDAL RAZ AK

ALI (ISN 685), ) ) P etitioner , ) ) v. ) Ci vilAc ti on N o. 09 -7 45 (R CL ) ) BARACK

OBAMA, e t al

. , )

) Re spo nde nt s. ) ____________________________________)
M EM OR

AN DU MOP IN ION This matter come s befor e the Court on petitioner’ s Motion [ 1292] for an Orde r to Show Cause. Petitioner alleg es that re spondents violated the Court’s Or der [1169] of J une 1, 2009,

1 issued by J udg e Hog an in the consolidate d Guantana mo habea s case s (Misc. No. 08-442) . The Court agree s with petitioner and will there fore grant pe titioner’s motion. DI SCU SSIO N L ate last year , responde nts moved to seal the uncla ssified fac tual returns that the Court
re qu i re d re s p o n d en t s t o fi l e f

o r e ac hGu an t an am o h ab ea s p et i t i o n er . OnJ un e 1 , 2 0 0 9 , J u d ge Hog an denie d responde nts’s motion. In the ac company ing Me morandum [1195] , J udg e Hog an noted that the September

11, 2008 Protective Or der pr ovided that “the ultimate de cision to deem information protec ted is left to the Court.” (Me m. at 2.) Ac cording ly , J udg e Hog an orde red
re sp on de nts2

to e ith e r ( i) pu

bli c ly fi le a de c la ssi fi e d o r u

nc la ssi fi e d f

a c tua l r e tur

n o r ( ii) fi le under se al with petitioner’s c ounsel and the a ppropriateMerits J udg e an unclassified f

actua l return highlightingwith a colore d marke r the e x act wor ds or lines the g overnme nt seeks to be de emed pr otected, a s well as a me morandum explaining why

eac h word or line should be protec ted. (June 1, 2009 Order a

t 1-2.) Pursuant to the Or der, r espondents publicly filed a de classified fac tual return on July

29, 2009. (Notice of Public Filingof F actua l Return [1282] .) Petitioner’s publicly

filed fa ctual re turn was he avily reda cted. In revie wingthe reda ctions, petitioner’s counse l found that some of the r edac ted information wa s not classified. Petitioner’s counsel then c ontacted r espondents about the non- classified r edac ted information. Respondents replied that both classified and unc lassified, but protec ted, information wa s reda cted f rom the publicly

filed fa ctual re turn. As a r esult, petitioner filed this motion alleging that r e sp on de nts imp ro pe rl y wi thh e ld n on -c la ssi fi e d in fo rm atio n f ro m th e pu

bli c fa c tua l r e tur

n in violation of the J une 1, 2009 Or der. This Court ag ree s with J udg e B ates a nd finds that responde nts withheld information as protec ted without following the proce dures se t forth in the J une 1 Or der. Se eAb du l H am id A lGh izzawi , 0 5- 23 78 , O rd e r [2 66 ] at 2 ( D. D. C. Sept. 24 , 2 00 9) (B ate s, J.). To wi thh old information as prote cted, r espondents must “file unde r sea l . . . an unclassifie d fac tual return highlighting . . . the e x act wor ds or lines the g overnme nt seeks to be de emed pr otected, a s well as
a memora ndum expl ainingwhy

eac h word or line should be protec ted.” ( J une 1, 2009 Or der at 2.) Respondents have not fulfilled either of these re quirements. The y did not file a fa ctual re turn under se al with the portions highlighted that they soug ht to protect, and the y did not file a memorandum e x plaining why the information should be prote cted. Rathe r, re spondents filed a decla ssified fac tual return that reda cted “ any properly classified infor

mation, as well as3

inf or matio n d e signate d a s ‘ pr ote c te d’ wh ic h, wh ile no t c la ssi fi e d, imp lic ate s si gnif ic ant s e c ur ity or other inter est.” (O pp’n at 4.) Such w ithholding of infor mation as protec ted without Court approva l is directly

contra ry to the J une 1, 2009 Or der. In a dd iti on , r e sp on de nts ’ a rgume nt t hat th e pu bli c fa c tua l r e tur

n is pr op e r u

nd e r o pti on

(i ) the June 1, 20 09 Or de r i s w ith out me ri t. A s Judg e B ate s st ate d, “ [f]il ingpurs ua nt t o o pti on

(i ) i s
ava ila ble wh e re a

pu bli c fa c tua l r e tur

n r e da c ts only classified infor mation.” Ab du l H

am id A lGh izzawi , 05-2378, Orde r [266] at 3. Indeed, “ [i ]f option (i) gove rned the filing of public fac tual returns that reda cted pr otected inf ormation, option (ii) would be unnec essar y .” Id. Ac c or din g ly , th e Court

sh a ll gra nt p e tit ion e r’ s mo tio n. Pe tit ion e r’ s c ouns e l sh a ll f ile
un de r s e a l a

pr op os e d f

a c tua l r e tur

n f or pu bli c fi lin gthat in c lud e s th e pu bli c ly ava ila ble inf or matio n th at r e sp on de nts have re da c te d. Re sp on de nts sh a ll s ho w c a us e in a me mor and

um i n response to petitioner’s propose d return w ithin seven day s. The memora ndum shall provide the specific rea sons why

responde nts seek to withhold information from the public f actua l return a s protec ted. Any

reply by petitioner shall be f

iled within five day s therea fter. The Court will defe r to J udg e Hog an as to whe ther other relief is warr anted f

or violation of his J une 1, 2009 Or der. This orde r grant’s this petitioner a ll the relief he seeks in this case . A separ ate or der sha ll issue this date.
Signed by Royce C. L amber

th, Chief J udg e, on Nove mber 9, 2009.