Packwood v. Senate Select Committee on Ethics

Background

Senator Bob Packwood sought to block a court order that would force him to turn over diary transcripts and tapes to the Senate Select Committee on Ethics. The District Court enforced the committee’s subpoena after finding the records relevant. The senator asked the Court of Appeals for a stay but that court denied his emergency request, and he then asked the Justice for a stay pending appeal to the Supreme Court.

Reasoning

The Justice applied the established three-part test for a stay: a reasonable chance four Justices would agree to hear the case, a significant possibility the Court would reverse the lower judgment, and a likelihood of irreparable harm if the subpoena went forward. He rejected each of the senator’s three claims. First, the argument that the subpoena was overly broad was treated as a fact-heavy dispute, and evidence showed the diary materials had been altered, making them relevant to an investigation into obstruction. Second, the privacy challenge under the Fourth Amendment relied on the District Court’s balancing of privacy against government interests, a factual finding the Justice would not second-guess. Third, the claim that producing papers would violate the Fifth Amendment was unlikely to get review because the Court had recently declined a similar issue. Because the case was already before the Court of Appeals and that court had denied a stay, the applicant faced a particularly heavy burden.

Real world impact

The Justice denied the stay, allowing the committee to obtain the requested diary materials while appeals continue. The decision means the senator must comply for now and that disputed constitutional questions will be resolved later on appeal.