Fourth Circuit Holds DOJ's Demand for Journalists' LinkedIn Records in a Leak Probe Too Broad

Status: A Fourth Circuit panel ruled Tuesday, as reported by Politico and Bloomberg Law. Significant parts of the case remain sealed. AFNS did not retrieve the opinion PDF from the court's public site. The decision requires the records demand to be narrowed; it does not itself close the leak investigation.

A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on Tuesday held that sealed court orders requiring LinkedIn to give the Justice Department journalists' metadata in a national-security leak investigation were too broad and must be narrowed, Politico and Bloomberg Law report.

Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson, a Reagan appointee, wrote for the court. According to Bloomberg Law, the orders required LinkedIn to produce the targeted journalists' metadata from an 18-month period and to keep the disclosure secret. Wilkinson called that demand overbroad, Bloomberg Law reported, saying it would result in LinkedIn turning over records that could reveal "a vast number of confidential sources."

Politico reported that the panel blocked the administration from obtaining that sweeping set of records, quoting Wilkinson as saying the "overbroad" search would "deal a damaging blow to First Amendment freedoms" and could expose confidential sources with no connection to the investigation. "Confidentiality of sources is the lifeblood of a free press," Wilkinson wrote, according to Politico.

The government has a substantial interest in investigating national-security leaks. At a public argument in September, Justice Department national security attorney Joshua Ferrentino told the court that prosecutors were seeking details of about 1,900 LinkedIn interactions from six users, Politico reported at the time. Tuesday's coverage describes a remand to narrow the demand substantially, not a holding that the department may obtain no records at all. AFNS did not find a Justice Department comment on the Tuesday ruling in the portions of the Politico and Bloomberg Law reports it was able to review.

The appeal was heard in Richmond. Details of the underlying leak, the journalists, and much of the evidence remain under seal, according to earlier reporting.