Biden sues to block release of interview recordings

Former US president Joe Biden has filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice (DOJ) in an attempt to prevent the release of audio recordings and transcripts of private conversations with his biographer, according to multiple sources. The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Washington, DC, and comes ahead of the department's planned release of the materials to the House Judiciary Committee and the conservative Heritage Foundation.

The conversations, which took place in 2016 and 2017, were with Mark Zwonitzer, the author who worked with Biden on two memoirs. The recordings were made during and immediately after Biden served as Barack Obama's vice-president, as reported by The Guardian.

Coverage of the legal challenge

The lawsuit has been reported by both the Jerusalem Post, citing Reuters, and The Guardian, with slightly different emphases. The Jerusalem Post framed the story in neutral terms, focusing on the procedural details: Biden's legal action to bar the release, the DOJ's planned release to the committee and the Heritage Foundation, and the lawsuit's claim that the committee's request is "pretextual and invalid."

The Guardian, adopting a more critical tone, highlighted that the interviews "exposed Biden's frequent memory lapses and helped derail his 2024 re-election campaign," and quoted from Biden's attorneys arguing that the release would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of President Biden's privacy."

Key claims

  • Biden sued the DOJ to block the release of audio and transcripts of his 2016-2017 conversations with his biographer, according to both the Jerusalem Post (citing Reuters) and The Guardian.
  • The DOJ plans to release the materials to the House Judiciary Committee and the Heritage Foundation, per the Jerusalem Post's report.
  • The Heritage Foundation sought the records after they were used in Special Counsel Robert Hur's 2023 investigation into Biden's handling of classified documents, as reported by Reuters via the Jerusalem Post. Hur declined to bring charges, according to the same source.
  • Biden's lawsuit claims the committee's request is "pretextual and invalid," a claim reported by Reuters via the Jerusalem Post, but not mentioned in The Guardian's account.
  • The recordings were made during and immediately after Biden's vice-presidency, as reported by The Guardian.
  • Robert Hur's report portrayed Biden as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory," according to The Guardian. The Jerusalem Post did not include this quote.
  • Biden withdrew from the 2024 election following repeated questioning of his age and mental competence, according to The Guardian. This claim is not present in the Jerusalem Post's report.

The legal and political context

The recordings stem from a period when Biden was a private citizen after serving as vice-president. They later became part of Special Counsel Robert Hur's investigation into whether Biden improperly retained classified documents. Hur concluded that no criminal charges were warranted, but his report, released in 2024, drew attention to Biden's memory and age.

According to the lawsuit, as reported by Reuters via the Jerusalem Post, the DOJ initially fought the Heritage Foundation's 2024 Freedom of Information Act request for the records, treating them as exempt, until President Donald Trump took office. The department then announced it would release the records in response to the House Judiciary Committee's request — a move Biden's legal team argues is a pretext to circumvent federal law.

The DOJ, for its part, issued a statement defending the release. A department spokesperson said the Biden administration had sought to hide recordings that demonstrated a decline in Biden's cognitive abilities as far back as 2016, adding: "We will fight to ensure the American people can hear these recordings and dr..." (the statement was truncated in the source).

Perspectives

  • Biden's legal team: Argues that the release would violate Biden's privacy rights, calling the committee's request "pretextual and invalid" and an "unwarranted invasion" of his personal life. They emphasize that the DOJ, having obtained the materials through a criminal investigation, bears a responsibility to protect them from disclosure.
  • Department of Justice: Contends that the recordings are in the public interest, with a spokesperson accusing the previous administration of trying to hide evidence of cognitive decline. The DOJ maintains the release is necessary to inform the American people.
  • The Guardian's framing: Suggests that the release would further damage Biden's legacy, linking the recordings to his withdrawal from the 2024 race and portraying the lawsuit as a final attempt to keep damaging information secret.
  • The Jerusalem Post/Reuters framing: Presents the story as a straightforward legal dispute, focusing on the procedural timeline and the lawsuit's claims without editorial commentary on Biden's fitness or the political implications.