The appeals court rejects Biden’s request to block the publication of an audio recording of his interviews with the memoirist

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court has rejected a request by Joe Biden to block the release of audio recordings and transcripts of interviews he conducted with a memoirist before he was elected president.

A divided three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit suspended its decision until August 3 to allow Biden more time to consider another appeal.

The panel’s 2-1 ruling late Monday found there was a “substantial” public interest in disclosing material that Biden wants to keep secret. The majority indicated that redacting the recordings would help protect Biden’s privacy.

“We conclude that any remaining violation of personal privacy by disclosing the redacted material now is likely not outweighed by the public interest in disclosure,” the ruling said.

Judge Florence Pan, nominated by Biden, a Democrat, wrote a dissenting opinion in which she said Biden had shown a “high concern for privacy” in keeping the material hidden.

“The conversations in question took place at Biden’s home, and the government obtained their recordings in the context of a criminal investigation that did not lead to an indictment,” she wrote.

The appeal was also heard by Chief D.C. Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan and Judge Gregory Katsas. Democratic President Barack Obama nominated Srinivasan, who chose Biden as his running mate. Katsas was nominated by President Donald Trump, a Republican who lost as president to Biden in 2020 but is re-elected to the White House in 2024.

Read more: Judge permanently blocks release of special counsel Jack Smith’s report on classified Trump documents issue

Mark Zunitzer, who worked with Biden on two memoirs, 2007’s “Promises to Keep” and 2017’s “Promise Me, Daddy,” interviewed him at his home in 2016 and 2017. Biden’s lawyers say the conversations were frank, personal and intended to remain private.

Biden spokesman TJ Ducklo said the former president disagreed with the ruling but “respects the courts and the vital role an independent judiciary plays in a healthy democracy.”

“President Biden’s conversations regarding a decade-old book that discussed his late son are private, and were provided to the Department of Justice with the express condition that they remain that way,” Ducklo said in a statement. “Reversing course and announcing this is just the latest example of this administration using the[Department of Justice]as a weapon of political retaliation.”

The recordings were obtained by special counsel Robert Hoare, who investigated Biden’s handling of classified documents since he was a Delaware senator and Obama’s vice president. Republicans in Congress demanded these materials after Hoare refused to file charges against the then-President.

Biden sued and sought an injunction to block the Trump-era Justice Department from releasing the recordings to Congress and the conservative Heritage Foundation. The department previously argued that the recordings are exempt from disclosure under the Public Records Act.

Biden appealed the ruling after US District Judge Dabney Friedrich, who was nominated by Trump, ruled in June that the public interest in the materials outweighed any privacy rights Biden had.

Pan noted that the majority effectively rules in favor of immediate disclosure of the materials by denying Biden’s request for an injunction pending appeal.

“This of course will raise this issue,” she wrote.