The Washington Post

Court ruling unsealed in D.C. campaign investigation

A federal appeals court on Wednesday unsealed a recent opinion involving the ongoing investigation into D.C. Mayor Vincent C. Gray’s 2010 campaign.

The March ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit gave federal prosecutors the go-ahead to review millions of pages of records seized from the home and offices of D.C. businessman Jeffrey E. Thompson.

Wednesday’s decisions gives the public its first glimpse at the reasoning behind that opinion.

Thompson, who is the subject of a grand jury investigation, is alleged to have financed a “shadow campaign” for Gray that was not disclosed as required by election laws.

A three-judge panel of the court essentially decided not to get involved in the middle of an investigation, dismissing Thompson’s appeal of a lower court ruling for lack of jurisdiction. Thompson had argued that some of the documents seized on March 2 went beyond the scope of the search warrants.

The 16-page opinion notes that the government has already made available to Thompson most of the property seized and that Thompson is concerned less about the return of his property than about the “unlawful revelation of …private information.”

Thompson “seeks to prevent the government from reviewing all or most of the evidence for a period of time, while [Thompson] and an independent third party screen the seized material,” the opinion states.

The ruling also offers insight into the status of the investigation. In January, according to the opinion, the U.S. Attorney’s Office reached an agreement with Thompson about how to weed out other documents protected by various privileges.

But the status of at least some of the records is still in limbo. Thompson has until the end of July to decide whether to seek review by the Supreme Court.

The unsealed ruling redacts specific references to Thompson, but it is clear from lower court opinions that he is the subject of the case.

The court agreed to unseal its ruling in response to a request from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. The nonprofit group that provides free legal assistance to journalists, including The Washington Post, questioned the need for complete secrecy when a redacted version of the lower court opinion had already been reported by news organizations.

Ann covers legal affairs in the District and Maryland for the Washington Post. Ann previously covered state government and politics in California, New Hampshire and Maryland. She joined the Post in 2005.


Success! Check your inbox for details. You might also like:

Please enter a valid email address

See all newsletters

Show Comments
Most Read


Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

Your Three. Videos curated for you.
Play Videos
Deaf banjo player teaches thousands
Unconventional warfare with a side of ale
It's in the details: Five ways to enhance your kitchen makeover
Play Videos
Drawing as an act of defiance
A fighter pilot helmet with 360 degrees of sky
Border collies: A 'mouse trap' for geese on the National Mall
Play Videos
Bao: The signature dish of San Francisco
This man's job is binge-watching for Netflix
What you need to know about Planned Parenthood
Play Videos
How to save and spend money at college
Pandas, from birth to milk to mom
Europe's migrant crisis, explained

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.