Case 1:13-cv-01363-EGS Document 115 Filed 07/29/16 Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.,

Plaintiff,
v.
No. 1:13-cv-01363-EGS
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Defendant.

NON-PARTY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTONS RESPONSE TO

JUDICIAL WATCHS NOTICE OF NEW, RELEVANT INFORMATION
Counsel to Secretary Clinton hereby respond to Judicial Watchs recent filing (Dkt. 114),
in which Judicial Watch submits to the Court Secretary Clintons recent statement on 60 Minutes
about the reason why she used a personal e-mail server. Although Judicial Watch calls its filing a
Notice of New, Relevant Information, Judicial Watch has not offered anything new that bears
any relevance to the issues before this Court. Secretary Clintons recent statement is completely
consistent with her many other statements on this topic. She said:
PELLEY: All right. Do you think you blew it on the e-mails?
CLINTON: Oh, Ive said I did. Absolutely. I made a mistake. I should have had
two accounts; one for personal and one for office. And I didnt, and I take responsibility for that.
PELLEY: Why did you do that, have the private e-mail servers?
CLINTON: You know, Scott, other people did have -- other secretaries of state,
other high-ranking members of administrations, plural.[1] And it was recommended
1

In a May 2016 report, the State Department Inspector General reported that Secretary Powell had
exclusively used a personal e-mail account to conduct official business, as Secretary Powell had
previously disclosed in his book. Dkt. 102-7 at 21, 27. The Inspector General also reported that

Case 1:13-cv-01363-EGS Document 115 Filed 07/29/16 Page 2 of 4

that it would be convenient, and I thought it would be. Its turned out to be anything
but.
Dkt. 114-1 at 7. Consistent with her public statements on this topic, see, e.g., Dkt. 102-4 at 1, and
her statements to the FBI, see Dkt. 102-3 at 74, Secretary Clinton yet again said that she used
personal e-mail for the sake of convenience. Judicial Watch still has provided no reason to believe
that, if deposed, she would say anything different.
Judicial Watch claims to want to know who recommended that using private e-mail would
be convenient. As counsel to Secretary Clinton has previously explained, however, Judicial Watch
is not entitled to FOIA discovery, let alone a deposition of a former Cabinet Secretary, merely to
satisfy its curiosity. See Dkt. 109 at 3. This Court granted limited discovery for the purpose of
determining whether there is evidence substantiating Judicial Watchs allegation that the State
Department and Mrs. Clinton sought to deliberately thwart FOIA. Dkt. 73 at 11 (quotation marks
omitted). Nothing in Secretary Clintons remarks on 60 Minutes suggests that she or the State
Department intended to thwart FOIA, and therefore they bear no relevance to that question. Her
remarks do not justify the extraordinary measure of a deposition.

Secretary Kerry had used a personal e-mail account to conduct official business at the beginning
of his tenure and that Secretary Rices immediate staff used personal e-mail accounts to conduct
official business. Dkt. 102-7 at 23, 25.
2

Case 1:13-cv-01363-EGS Document 115 Filed 07/29/16 Page 3 of 4

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ David E. Kendall

David E. Kendall (D.C. Bar No. 252890)
Katherine M. Turner (D.C. Bar No. 495528)
Amy Mason Saharia (D.C. Bar No. 981644)
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
725 Twelfth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 434-5000
Facsimile: (202) 434-5029
dkendall@wc.com
kturner@wc.com
asaharia@wc.com
Counsel for Non-Party Hillary Rodham
Clinton
July 29, 2016

Case 1:13-cv-01363-EGS Document 115 Filed 07/29/16 Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, David E. Kendall, counsel for Non-Party Hillary Rodham Clinton, certify that, on July
29, 2016, a copy of this Response to Judicial Watchs Notice of New, Relevant Information was
filed via the Courts electronic filing system, and served via that system upon all parties required
to be served.
/s/ David E. Kendall
David E. Kendall