A court filing says President Biden’s lawyers plan to object to the Justice Department releasing redacted transcripts and audio of his 2017 conversations with a book ghostwriter, a move that could delay a scheduled June production. The filing reports the DOJ does not oppose Biden’s potential intervention, while the FOIA requester and the department trade accusations about slow-walking and obstruction. The recordings were collected during Special Counsel Robert Hur’s probe into classified documents and are now at the center of a fight over transparency and privilege. This dispute folds together White House claims, Heritage Foundation demands, and DOJ deadlines into a tense legal standoff.
Assistant Attorney General Civil Division Brett Shumate told the court that “President Biden, through counsel, has advised the Department that he intends to seek to intervene to prevent any such disclosures,” and added “The Department does not oppose intervention.” The filing makes clear a formal intervention is expected and that production timelines hinge on whether Biden’s team files in time. If Biden objects before the deadline, the release of roughly 70 hours of redacted recordings would be pushed back to June 15.
The filing also states plainly that “Defendant intends to disclose the written transcript and audio recordings at issue in this matter, with redactions, to Congress, pursuant to a request from the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, as well as to Plaintiffs.” That disclosure reportedly follows a House request from March and the department’s efforts to balance competing legal obligations. The FOIA requester says the public deserves access, and the DOJ appears ready to comply unless blocked by intervention.
Biden’s team points to promises made during the Hur probe, quoting Biden’s spokesperson: “President Biden cooperated fully with special counsel Hur, and agreed to provide audiotapes of conversations with his biographer for a book about his deceased son on the condition that they would not be made public,” Biden spokesperson TJ Ducklo told Politico in a statement. “The DOJ themselves have said these tapes serve no public interest.
Ducklo pushed the argument further: “What’s happening now isn’t about transparency. It’s about politics,” Ducklo continued. “If this Administration were genuinely committed to transparency, they would release Volume 2 of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s report on Donald Trump’s own alleged mishandling of classified documents. That report contains information Americans actually deserve to see.” Those lines frame the White House position as one of reciprocal grievances about selective disclosure.
Heritage’s FOIA lead, Mike Howell, argued these records matter for public judgment, saying “These tapes will further prove the massive lie regarding Biden’s fitness for office and the fact Biden revealed classified information,” Howell, president of Heritage’s Oversight Project, told Politico. “The shenanigans aren’t over: At the last possible second, and after every delay tactic possible, the autopen is objecting to the American People receiving transparency. ” Howell frames the move as the latest stall in a pattern of secrecy.
Shumate’s filing reiterates points from the Hur investigation and DOJ policy, noting Hur concluded his probe into Biden’s handling of classified documents and framed prosecutorial choices around longstanding DOJ policy of not indicting a sitting president. Hur also observed that a jury might be sympathetic to the then-older subject, calling him a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” That language from the special counsel underscores why the tapes became part of the review.
Shumate is blunt about timing and tactics: “It appears that after lengthy negotiation covering several months — at no point seeking to intervene into this case on a timely basis — President Biden has changed position and now seeks to even enjoin release of the portions of transcripts that match exact phrases quoted in the Hur Report,” the filing reads. The plaintiffs say intervention was delayed until the last moments and that they need clear judicial orders if release is to be stopped.
On the timing issue the filing quotes plaintiffs describing their view of what relief would be required: “As Plaintiffs understand the matter, President Biden would need an order barring release in this case and an order enjoining the Department from producing to the House Judiciary Committee all by June 15, 2026.” The DOJ filing accuses Biden’s counsel of missed deadlines and a lack of substantive engagement, saying “President Biden’s lead counsel was unable to provide any information about President Biden’s submissions arguing that such discussion was somehow premature (whereas, in reality it is 16 months late) and incredibly indicating that despite the June 15, 2026 production date, the motion to intervene would not be filed until mid-next week and that President Biden would seek up to three days after a ruling granting a motion to intervene to submit a proposed schedule for substantive relief,” the filing read.
The filing does not mince words about tactics, adding “That is no way to conduct litigation and smacks of kicking the can down the road to justify delaying the June 15, 2026 production by some form of administrative injunction.” The department finishes with a pointed line aimed at transparency advocates: “The public deserves to hear the tapes and read the transcripts as redacted by President Donald J. Trump’s Department of Justice,” Shumate’s filing concluded.
