In the new ourt filing, the State Department continued to object to depositions of former Clinton aides and other officials in the lawsuit brought by the the conservative group Judicial Watch, | AP Photo State Department wants limits on questioning of Clinton aides

Top aides to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton should not be questioned about an ongoing FBI investigation into the presence of classified information on her private email server or about the substance of the messages that were exchanged, as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, the State Department said in a court filing Tuesday night.

In the new submission, the State Department continued to object to depositions of former Clinton aides and other officials in the lawsuit brought by the the conservative group Judicial Watch, but U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan ruled in February that he would permit "narrowly tailored" discovery about the unusual private server set-up used by Clinton during her four years as America's top diplomat.


So, the question before the court now is what the scope of the depositions and written questions will be. Judicial Watch argued in a filing last month that it should be permitted to depose three former aides to Clinton: Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin, and computer specialist Bryan Pagliano. The group also asked for access to four other named State officials, including Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy.

State is not specifically urging Sullivan to scratch anyone from that list, apparently clearing the way for each person to be called to appear at a deposition that could last up to seven hours. However, State asked Sullivan to cabin the questioning to details about why the server was created.

"State submits that the scope of discovery must be limited and specified at the outset to prevent questioning that exceeds the limited inquiry that the Court has authorized," the filing from Justice Department laywers says. "Based on the Court’s statements at the February 23 hearing, State understands the scope of permissible discovery to be 'the reasons for the creation of [the clintonemail.com] system.'"

"State respectfully submits that the Court’s order should specify that discovery is limited to this topic. To that end, State requests that the Court clarify that Plaintiff is not entitled to discovery on matters unrelated to the topic identified by the Court, to include without limitation: the substantive information sought by Plaintiff in its FOIA request in this case, which involves the employment status of a single employee; the storage, handling,transmission, or protection of classified information, including cybersecurity issues; and questions about any pending investigations," the submission says. "State objects to any discovery requests pertaining to the FBI’s pending investigation into matters referred to it by the Inspectors General of the Intelligence Community and State in connection with former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server."

Judicial Watch has said it does not intend to seek Clinton's testimony at this time, but may do so in the future. The FBI, meanwhile, is reportedly seeking to interview many or all of the same aides in connection with its probe of the classified information in Clinton's account.

The FOIA suit at issue sought records about Abedin's employment arrangements. Judicial Watch contends it may not have gotten all the records it was entitled to because of the email arrangement Clinton put in place.

State is also asking Sullivan to order that the transcripts of any depositions be kept secret for three days after they are given, so that classified information or any disclosures about the investigation can be edited out, if necessary.

It is still possible that Judicial Watch's request to depose the former Clinton aides could face resistance from the aides themselves. They could seek to quash any subpoenas. Pagliano previously asserted his Fifth Amendment rights in connection with Congressional inquiries and and FBI probe. The FBI reportedly granted him immunity, but the scope of that agreement is unclear.