Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CITIZENS UNITED,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 18-1862-RDM
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Defendant.
Plaintiff, Citizens United, and Defendant, the United States Department of State
(“State”), by their respective undersigned counsel, submit this joint status report pursuant to the
1. Citizens United filed this Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) case on August
8, 2018, alleging that State had failed to issue a determination on its FOIA request seeking
certain records about a briefing at the State Department involving Christopher Steele in October
2. State made its first release of records to Citizens United on February 20, 2019,
consisting of two records, totaling four pages. State made a second production on April 30,
2019, consisting four documents, three of which were released in part, totaling seven pages. One
document was withheld in full. State made a third and final production on May 6, 2019,
consisting of two documents, one of which was released in part, and also re-released one of the
documents released on April 30, but with additional information unredacted. The May 6
Accordingly, the parties have agreed to the following briefing schedule, which the parties request
STATEMENT BY PLAINTIFF
4. Plaintiff would like to outline briefly the context for the proposed briefing
schedule. On October 11, 2016 — exactly four weeks before Election Day 2016 —
Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent, met with a senior official in the U.S.
Department of State and shared “research” that he had collected on a presidential candidate
challenging the incumbent party. That research, collected in what is now known as the “Steele
Dossier,” contained salacious, unverified, and some even fantastic claims of wrongdoing for
5. This FOIA case seeks disclosure of records from the State Department regarding
the meeting between senior department personnel and that former British agent, Christopher
Steele, who was peddling the never-verified Dossier to various government representatives and
6. The records that the State Department thus far has produced in this case
demonstrate that a State Department official communicated critical information to the FBI,
1
See J. Solomon, “Steele’s stunning pre-FISA confession: Informant needed to air Trump dirt
before election,” The Hill (May 7, 2019).
2
Case 1:18-cv-01862-RDM Document 10 Filed 05/10/19 Page 3 of 3
following the October 11, 2016 briefing with Steele. This case is of immense national
importance because the withheld records relate to what the federal agencies knew and when
they knew it, particularly when representations about the Steele Dossier were made to the
7. Plaintiff believes that the American public has a right to know the details of any
improper federal government involvement in the 2016 elections. It is for these reasons, and
other reasons as will be explained in the briefing, that Plaintiff will contest the FOIA
Respectfully submitted,
2
See J. Solomon, “FBI’s Steele story falls apart: False intel and media contacts were flagged
before FISA,” The Hill (May 9, 2019).
3