Download raw source

Delivered-To: john.podesta@gmail.com Received: by 10.25.88.78 with SMTP id m75csp752331lfb; Sun, 21 Feb 2016 06:44:33 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.25.209.73 with SMTP id i70mr2098536lfg.0.1456065873672; Sun, 21 Feb 2016 06:44:33 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: <twh37@georgetown.edu> Received: from mail-lb0-x233.google.com (mail-lb0-x233.google.com. [2a00:1450:4010:c04::233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id qy1si3323012lbb.11.2016.02.21.06.44.33 for <john.podesta@gmail.com> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 21 Feb 2016 06:44:33 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of twh37@georgetown.edu designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::233 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c04::233; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of twh37@georgetown.edu designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::233 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=twh37@georgetown.edu; dkim=pass header.i=@georgetown.edu Received: by mail-lb0-x233.google.com with SMTP id x1so68913113lbj.3 for <john.podesta@gmail.com>; Sun, 21 Feb 2016 06:44:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=georgetown.edu; s=google; h=mime-version:sender:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=Lgm1kyFW7YGSLqM9pf5M0lDF79YcH7bEGlV5wWewS2Y=; b=npH3fcfgNPU+wBfvoICzr8XrgZqHlrL56DdxfEISi0T1Ns5LM0sx2HtGYpgs5XbsoY bGk5io7QgHiQHTSwDINQrLv0egoN8lWsC9Jca3Ld6/QrRl3uPzC0BT7XDVz+T69xgg06 uNLR4cSfkPrK9GSqlrto67/0r4fF7+mo1g7Y4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:date:message-id:subject:from :to:content-type; bh=Lgm1kyFW7YGSLqM9pf5M0lDF79YcH7bEGlV5wWewS2Y=; b=jQP56AsA168UhoLoyyHQ10d7wFVg0KVy++uOly13Dh/P6+HaCim613c2K76+cFzev3 XI24MEt2yi+tLqTIx+kBYNJ9XhDaTTILRzG9LS4ujx4nDCU8mtzo+ttbatSeOEsj1d2h tW/PUSsfakZgh6KtqfuhjfRVIuRjxHjsz7hyflB+deNjWwns72ONQRGsDXH15SafpSQz CLYJ0aZbfIMmuaeBC2PQ5ADGH9PNar9mW5uApYWt/Sn0IwIsTZYPoo1GxMjyQI979xcM YEdgHqGTZmzlpVlfLB6T1zctunRROviQEaDORLUn/mWinXqq2KDQ7BD90E9ec+IjE002 YyxQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOTEn5qA7VxyHIMvuRNUNYfRu9BNB2u3dOPK5t2JrIpHqo++4kgdmlO9fIlBCW10NdX9zTWMNM1E4rM+dTtf MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.63.200 with SMTP id i8mr8408119lbs.5.1456065873050; Sun, 21 Feb 2016 06:44:33 -0800 (PST) Sender: twh37@georgetown.edu Received: by 10.112.151.167 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Feb 2016 06:44:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2016 09:44:33 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0UBI59GjWuNkoUL-nwyHs22985Y Message-ID: <CAAEAAs1SQj5q0F6XwqMvYX11dGyNp-2Qm_F5UiAaLA=MWg=CWA@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Congressional Investigations class paper topic From: Trent Holbrook <twh37@law.georgetown.edu> To: john.podesta@gmail.com, richard_leon@dcd.uscourts.gov, John D Podesta <podesta@georgetown.edu>, Richard J Leon <leonr@law.georgetown.edu> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3efde221372052c48c1ad --001a11c3efde221372052c48c1ad Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Professor Podesta & Judge Leon, I am in your Congressional Investigations class and was hoping to get your advice on what I was considering for my paper topic for the class. I was thinking about addressing the limits to the Benghazi Committee=E2=80=99s au= thority (statutorily and, perhaps more interestingly, constitutionally) to subpoena (potentially all) e-mails on Hillary Clinton=E2=80=99s private server, most= ly analyzing the balance between the right to investigate legitimate topics against the complicated issues of Clinton=E2=80=99s right to and expectatio= ns of privacy in her e-mails, given the amount of personal information also contained on her server. Specific topics could include: - who makes the determination of what is private and what is not in response to a subpoena and how that determination is conveyed (e.g. refu= sal to produce, going to court, etc.) if the determination is made not to subpoena all e-mails but select ones; - issues related to the authority to withhold e-mails based on national security concerns and who makes that determination, the State Department= , Clinton, or the Committee; - an analysis of if there is a diminished expectation of privacy to Clinton=E2=80=99s personal communications because there are work-related= e-mails on the server as well (and the potential ramifications of this for other federal employees who ever use their personal e-mails for even minor wor= k issues) and if all her private e-mails could be subpoenaed as well under this theory; - issues related to separations of powers concerns due to requesting such a large swath of e-mails from an executive branch department head (= and the unique concerns that may possibly arise from Clinton being a presidential candidate); and - if it is within the statutory scope of the Committee=E2=80=99s authori= ty to issue such a subpoena and, if so, if that scope is a proper and constitutional one (or, if it is not, if it could be subpoenaed by the House as a whole instead or some other similar scheme to avoid these leg= al questions). I would greatly appreciate your advice on if this would be an appropriate paper topic. Thank you, Trent Holbrook --001a11c3efde221372052c48c1ad Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr"> <p class=3D"MsoNormal">Professor Podesta & Judge Leon,</p><p class=3D"M= soNormal"><br></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal">I am in your Congressional Investi= gations class and was hoping to get your advice on what I was considering for my paper topic for the class.=C2=A0 I was thinking about addressing the limits to the Benghazi Committee=E2=80=99s authority (statut= orily and, perhaps more interestingly, constitutionally) to subpoena (potentially all) e-mails= on Hillary Clinton=E2=80=99s private server, mostly analyzing the balance betw= een the right to investigate legitimate topics against the complicated issues of Cl= inton=E2=80=99s right to and expectations of privacy in her e-mails, given the amount of pe= rsonal information also contained on her server.=C2=A0 Specific topics could include:</p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"></p><ul><li><span = style=3D"text-indent: -0.25in;">who makes the determination of what is priv= ate and what is not in response to a subpoena and how that determination is conveyed (e.g. refusal to produce, going to court, etc.) if the determinati= on is made not to subpoena all e-mails but select ones;</span><br></li><li>= <span style=3D"text-indent: -0.25in;">issues related to the authority to wi= thhold e-mails based on national security concerns and who makes that determination, the S= tate Department, Clinton, or the Committee;</span><br></li><li><span style=3D"te= xt-indent: -0.25in;">an analysis of if there is a diminished expectation of privacy to Clinton=E2=80=99s personal communications because there are w= ork-related e-mails on the server as well (and the potential ramifications of this for other federal employees who ever use their personal e-mails for even minor = work issues) and if all her private e-mails could be subpoenaed as well under th= is theory;=C2=A0</span></li><li><span style=3D"text-indent: -0.25in;">issue= s related to separations of powers concerns due to=C2=A0requesting such a l= arge swath of e-mails from an executive branch department head (and the uni= que concerns that may possibly arise from Clinton being a presidential cand= idate); and</span><br></li><li><span style=3D"text-indent: -0.25in;">if it = is within the statutory scope of the Committee=E2=80=99s authority to issue such a subpoena and, if so, if that scope is a proper an= d constitutional one (or, if it is not, if it could be subpoenaed by the Hous= e as a whole instead or some other similar scheme to=C2=A0avoid these legal ques= tions).</span></li></ul><p></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal">I would greatly appre= ciate your advice on if this would be an appropriate paper topic.</p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><br></p><p class=3D"M= soNormal">Thank you,</p><p class=3D"MsoNormal">Trent Holbrook</p><p class= =3D"MsoNormal"></p> </div> --001a11c3efde221372052c48c1ad--