Ibrahim v. Department of Homeland et al

Filing 307

ORDER REGARDING SECURITY SCREENING OF COURT PERSONNEL. Signed by Judge Alsup on January 6, 2010. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/6/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 RAHINAH IBRAHIM, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., Defendants. / ORDER REGARDING SECURITY SCREENING OF COURT PERSONNEL No. C 06-00545 WHA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Although the Court previously held that court reporters need not be vetted by the screening process generally required for clearance to view sensitive security information (SSI), the undersigned has determined that one of the court reporters in San Francisco, Ms. Connie Kuhl, has been already cleared to view classified information. As an accommodation to the government, and without modifying any previously issued orders, the Court suggests that all depositions be taken as evidentiary hearings in the San Francisco federal courthouse by court reporter Kuhl, and that Ms. Kuhl also serve as the court reporter at trial. The government is free to contact Ms. Kuhl to obtain additional information regarding her prior security clearance, and further vet her as they see fit. Please let the undersigned know as soon as possible whether this suggestion holds promise. The government should also be aware that the judicial assistant to the undersigned was kindly contacted by Mr. Jarett Merk, a security specialist from the Justice Department, whose

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

understanding was that the undersigned's law clerks and other court personnel would be subject to background checks and security screening. No, the Court has already ruled that court personnel will have access to SSI presented in this case and are not subject to the screening process. This will include one law clerk to the undersigned (and his successor, if needed), the deputy courtroom clerk, and the court's judicial assistant as necessary. Very likely, Mr. Merk was not made aware of the Court's prior ruling on this matter, and the undersigned would appreciate if government counsel contacted Mr. Merk directly to apprise him of the status of this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Dated: January 6, 2010.

WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2