At Extraordinary Hearing, Judge Questions Power to Stop Bolton Book That’s Been Widely Distributed

Still, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth pressed Bolton’s lawyer at length about whether he had moved forward with publication of the book—a damning account of his tenure in Trump’s White House—before the pre-publication review process had been completed, law reports

Saying the proverbial horse is “out of the barn,” a federal judge on Friday questioned his ability to block the release of John Bolton’s memoir, while also raising doubts about whether the former Trump national security adviser had fulfilled his obligation to have the book scrubbed of classified information.

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth, a more than 30-year veteran of Washington’s federal trial court, noted at the outset of a hearing held over videoconference that Bolton’s memoir had already been printed and distributed widely to bookstores, reviewers and reporters ahead of its planned release on June 23.
Drawing on his San Antonio roots, Lamberth said, “the horse, as we used to say in Texas, seems to be out of the barn.” Lamberth appeared skeptical about what he could do “about those books all over the country.”

Still, Lamberth pressed Bolton’s lawyer at length about whether he had moved forward with publication of the book—a damning account of his tenure in Trump’s White House—before the pre-publication review process had been completed. That process is common for authors who recount their time in high-level government posts.
Justice Department lawyer David Morrell called Bolton a “disgruntled” former official whose “brazenness” should not be awarded. “He created this problem,” argued Morrell, a senior lawyer in the Justice Department’s civil division.

Morrell said Bolton’s decision to move forward with publication marked a “flagrant breach” of nondisclosure agreements tied to his past service in the Trump administration.

Bolton’s lawyer, Charles Cooper of Washington’s Cooper & Kirk, insisted that Bolton had completed his side of the bargain, submitting a manuscript for review and working with U.S. officials to avoid the disclosure of any classified information. Describing the hearing repeatedly as “surreal,” he also argued Bolton has no control over the bookstores and companies that have copies of the book.

Any ruling against the Justice Department’s bid to stop distribution of the book would not necessarily signal a win for Bolton. The government’s original complaint seeks to strip Bolton of any profit from his memoir, for which he has reportedly been paid $2 million.

Lamberth agreed to hold the hearing a day after the Justice Department requested an “emergency” order preventing the release of Bolton’s memoir, which has already been printed and distributed to reporters, reviewers and bookstores. Many major news organizations have published reviews of the book, which, among other things, contends Trump sought help from China to win the upcoming presidential election.

As episodes detailed in Bolton’s manuscript have emerged ahead of the memoir’s planned Tuesday release, Trump has rebuked his former national security adviser, calling him “washed up” and his book a “compilation of lies and made up stories.” Trump has even suggested Bolton should face criminal charges.

“I will consider every conversation with me as president highly classified,” he told reporters at the White House. “So that would mean that, if he wrote a book and if the book gets out, he’s broken the law, and I would think that he would have criminal problems. I hope so.”

In a court filing late Thursday, Bolton’s lawyer asked Lamberth to dismiss the administration’s lawsuit. Cooper argued that Bolton had not violated any nondisclosure agreements tied to his White House tenure and that the bid to block the book’s release was moot since the memoir has been published and distributed not only throughout the U.S. but also abroad.

“It is clear from this evidence that the White House has abused the prepublication-review and classification process, and has asserted fictional national security concerns as a pretext to censor, or at least to delay indefinitely, Ambassador Bolton’s right to speak,” Cooper wrote.

Ahead of Friday’s hearing, prominent national news organizations and other free-speech advocates filed briefs arguing that the Trump administration’s lawsuit should be swiftly dismissed.

In a brief for PEN American, a non-profit that represents reporters and other writers, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher partners Theodore Boutrous said any order barring the release of Bolton’s book, titled “The Room Where It Happened,” would mark an unconstitutional prior restraint.

Boutrous, who had previously authored a Washington Post op-ed criticizing the Trump administration’s lawsuit, added that the Justice Department would likely also fail on its claim that Bolton had neglected to complete the mandated pre-publication review process.

“It is not difficult to see what is going on: The president is employing the apparatus of the federal government to punish his political enemies, thwart freedom of speech, and pursue his political interests in an election year.”

At the end of Friday’s hearing, Morrell kept with the barnyard metaphors to describe Bolton’s defense as “hogwash” and argue that, in moving forward with the release of his memoir, the former Trump adviser had “swung the barnyard doors open” and “let the horse run out.”

“The question is who let the horse out of the barn. And the answer to that question is clear,” Morrell said. “It’s Mr. Bolton.”