Comments on: Project Belfast: Judge Young Denies Motion To Quash https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/12/19/project-belfast-decision/ The Blog of International Judicial Assistance Fri, 13 Dec 2024 02:31:29 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: Upcoming Belfast Project Hearing | Letters Blogatory https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/12/19/project-belfast-decision/#comment-364 Tue, 10 Jan 2012 02:55:52 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=3497#comment-364 […] issue a subpoena to Boston College on behalf of the United Kingdom. Recall that Judge Young earlier denied the pair’s motion for leave to intervene. They claimed then, and they claim now, that the […]

]]> By: Judge Young Rules Against BC In The Project Belfast Case | Letters Blogatory https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/12/19/project-belfast-decision/#comment-363 Tue, 03 Jan 2012 11:05:51 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=3497#comment-363 […] The government’s subpoena tests the validity, or maybe the wisdom, of that promise.In his prior order, Judge Young ordered BC to produce the oral histories to the court for an in camera inspection. On […]

]]> By: Ted Folkman https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/12/19/project-belfast-decision/#comment-362 Mon, 19 Dec 2011 16:43:55 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=3497#comment-362 In reply to Chris Bray.

Thanks for the comment, Chris! BC’s stance is not surprising, because BC first proposed the notion of an in camera review. But BC could still appeal an order made after the in camera review requiring it to turn the documents over to the government. I think Moloney and McIntyre would face very steep hurdles in an appeal from the denial of their motion for leave to intervene.

]]> By: Chris Bray https://lettersblogatory.com/2011/12/19/project-belfast-decision/#comment-361 Mon, 19 Dec 2011 16:29:47 +0000 http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=3497#comment-361 A story in the Chronicle of Higher Education today says that BC is pleased with the decision and won’t appeal, so the First Circuit may not have a chance to weigh in. The only other plausible possibility is that Moloney and McIntyre appeal, but the appellate court would probably dispose of that appeal without reaching the more interesting questions.

]]>