Document EFTA 02831972¶
United States Attorney Southern District of Net¶
The Silvio J. Mello Building One Saint Andrew’s Plaza Neu• York Neu• York 10007¶
May 12, 2021¶
BY ECF¶
The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Southern District of New York United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square New York, New York 10007¶
| USDC SDNY | |
|---|---|
| DOCUMENT | |
| ELECTRONICALLY FILED | |
| DOC #: | |
| DATE FILED: | 5/17/21 |
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (MN)¶
Dear Judge Nathan:¶
The Government respectfully submits this letter in response to the Court’s Order dated May 10, 2021, which directed the Government to propose and justify any requests for redaction of the defendant’s memorandum in support of her supplemental pre-trial motions and exhibits. (Dkt. No. 274).¶
After reviewing the defense’s memorandum, the Government seeks a limited number of redactions. These proposed redactions are consistent with the three-part test articulated by the Second Circuit in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). Although the defense’s memorandum in support of her supplemental pm-trial motions is a judicial document subject to the common law presumption of access, the proposed redactions are narrowly tailored to protect the privacy interests of victims and third parties referenced in the document. These redactions are thus consistent with similar, tailored redactions permitted by the Court in this case to protect the privacy interests of third parties. (See, e.g., Dkt. No. 168, 232). Today the Government is submitting to the Court by email its proposed redactions to the defense’s memorandum, which the Government respectfully requests be filed under seal.¶
The Government respectfully submits that Exhibits C, E, F, G, H, and I should be filed entirely under seal in order to protect the privacy interests of victims and third parties implicated in the documents. The Court has accepted similar exhibits under seal in this case to protect such privacy interests. (See, e.g., Dkt. No. 168, 232).¶
Respectfully submitted,¶
AUDREY STRAUSS United States Attorney¶
By: s/ Maurene Comey Alison Moe Lara Pomerantz Andrew Rohrbach Assistant United States Attorneys Southern District of New York¶
Cc: Defense counsel (By ECF) The Court grants in part the Government’s redaction and scaling requests. Its conclusion is guided by the three-part lest articulated by the Second Circuit in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006).¶
The Court concludes that these are judicial documents and that the First Amendment and common law presumptions of access attach. Id. at 119-20. In balancing competing considerations against the presumption of access, the Court finds that the arguments the Government has put forward in this letter, including the need to protect the privacy interests of third parties and alleged victims, favor the narrowly tailored redactions. See United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1050 (2d Cir. 1995). Similarly, the Court concludes that the Government has shown that Exhibits E, F, G, H, and I should be filed under seal.
¶
With respect to Exhibit C, however, the Court concludes that narrowly tailored redactions are sufficient to advance the privacy interests the Government has identified. Accordingly, the Government is ORDERED to confer with defense counsel and submit proposed redactions to Exhibit C by May 20, 2021.
¶