DOJ-OGR-00015093.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 803 _ Filed 08/05/25 Page /7of9 of time along with the fact that most of the relevant witnesses, including Hiss, had died. Jd. at 293. The court ultimately ruled that the great historical importance of the Hiss case outweighed the minimal interest in preserving secrecy. Id. at 2938 (noting that alleged Soviet espionage against the United States was a controversial and historically significant issue in domestic politics during the 1940s and 1950s, and to the present day). Disclosure is being sought in this case due to immense public interest in Jeffrey Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell’s cases, along with public interest in the government’s handling of those investigations and prosecutions. The public interest identified by the government—while understandable—is insufficient to warrant disclosure of grand jury materials at this time. The government frames this interest as “historical,” yet it is nothing more than widespread and intense public curiosity about an ongoing criminal case. Neither In re Petition of National Security Archive, nor In re Petition of American Historical Association, support the conclusion that the Maxwell grand jury materials should be released. Each of those cases involved testimony dating back at least five decades, along with grand jury testimony relating to defendants and witnesses who were deceased. In re Biaggi is equally unavailing. In re Biaggi, 478 F.2d 489 (2d Cir. 1973). That case involved the unsealing of grand jury testimony of a U.S. Congressman, Mario Biaggi, who had not been indicted, and who waived any protection to secrecy by “seeking complete disclosure in the form of a motion requesting disclosure of his own testimony for its own sake.” In re Biaggi, 478 F.2d 489, 493 (2d Cir. 1973). The MARKUS/MOSS 7 DOJ-OGR-00015093