The Committee on Standards of officials Conduct of the United States House of Representatives ("the Committee") having requested access to certain information and materiala constituting grand jury materials in the proceedings referenced above; and it appearing that the Committee has a compelling and particularized mood for the information and materials which it has requested and that disclosure is essential to the ends of Justice and the Constitutional duties of the Committee,' and United States Department of Justice having consented to such disclosure subject to certain conditions, it is hereby

ORDERED, pursuant to Rule 6(a) of Pederal Rules of same is hereby

Criminal Procedure, that the Committee be

authorised to receive information and materials which are

custody of the aforesaid grand jury or the Department of Justics

93

and which the Department ha; agreed to disclose to the Committee for use in its investigation of the so-called "Abacan" allegations, excilding tran:cripts of grand jury testimony:

PROTI: EI, that the information and materials disclosed

to the Corsities fol:bant to this order shall not without the approval of this found in sulject to subpoena or other mandatory process initiated by any third forty; and

PATITE IUFTkik, that should the Committee determine that it is P... sary, in tie j、rformance of its Constitutional duties in conn: ¿tagi biti. its investigation, to disclose any such information er :aterials to the public or to any third party, the Committee shøil give ter. (10) days' advance notice of such

disclosure to t!~ Re; artЯent of Justice.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that one copy of the foregoing Motion for Leave to File a Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Motion to Stay and Unseal; proposed Memorandum of Points and Authorities of the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States House of Representatives in Opposition to Judge Hastings' Emergency Motion to Stay and Unseal Miscellaneous Order 87-1 (Dated August 5, 1987); and proposed Order was sent to the following individuals this 2nd day of September, 1987:

By Federal Express addressed as follows:

By regular U.S. Mail, postage prepaid addressed as follows:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

In re Request for Access to
Grand Jury Materials
G.J. 81-1 (Miami)

Misc. No. 87-1

Judge John D. Butzner, Jr.

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
AUTHORITIES OF THE UNITED STATES

Pursuant to the Court's Order of August 27, 1987, requesting

a list of authorities and statutes expected to be relied upon at oral argument, the United States respectfully submits the following outline of points and authorities.

INTRODUCTION

Pending before the Court is Judge Hastings' motion to stay and unseal an August 5, 1987 Order entered by Judge King ("August 5 Order") granting the request of the United States House of Representatives ("the House") for access to grand jury materials arising out of a previous criminal investigation of Judge Hastings. The House is conducting an impeachment inquiry concerning Judge Hastings.

The United States opposes Judge Hastings' motion to stay the August 5 Order and supports the House in its request for disclosure of the grand jury materials for use in its impeachment inquiry, having concluded that disclosure is appropriate in these circumstances. However, the United States does not oppose Judge Hastings' motion to lift the seal on the order and filings in relation to this matter, insofar as the August 5 Order and related filings do not reveal matters occurring before the grand

2

jury, but deal solely with the legal question of whether disclosure should be made to the House of Representatives.

In his motion, Judge Hastings also suggests that should disclosure be made to the House, disclosure of the entire grand jury record should also be made to the public in general and to himself in particular. The United States opposes wholesale disclosure of the grand jury materials to Judge Hastings, but recognizes that eventual disclosure of specific portions of the grand jury record may be appropriate in order to afford Judge Hastings a fair opportunity to respond to any specific charges that may eventually be made against him in the course of this impeachment proceedings. Should such circumstances arise, appropriate terms and conditions of any such disclosure may be established by the Court. On the issue of public release of the grand jury materials at this time, however, the United States would strongly object to any such release. None of the exceptions to Rule 6 (e) apply to permit such general public disclosure, and the policy behind our history of grand jury secrecy continues to apply to the question of public disclosure. 1/

1/ Judge Hastings makes a wholly unsubstantiated allegation that the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida may have "violated his duties" and "may be in contempt of this court." This statement is based on sheer speculation; Judge Hastings offers no evidence that there has been any improper disclosure, misuse or mishandling of the grand jury materials by the Eleventh Circuit or the government. In any event, his speculations are wholly irrelevant to the question of whether disclosure to the