A federal district judge in Washington, DC, has stayed a prior decision ordering the Bush administration to turn over by Tuesday additional documents and records of a number of federal agencies who sat on the task force that crafted the national energy strategy three years ago.

The ruling, which was issued Wednesday, was a setback for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), a national environmental group, and Judicial Watch, a public watchdog organization, which had filed requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to obtain the task force records in 2001.

In early April, U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman had ordered the Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Interior (DOI) and other federal agencies to release their task force-related documents by June 1 (see Daily GPI, April 5). He agreed this week to stay the ruling while Bush administration attorneys appeal the decision to a higher court.

But Friedman rejected the administration attorneys’ request for reconsideration of the April decision, saying that they “have articulated no ‘clear error of law'” that would warrant the court to take this action.

While this lawsuit challenged the Bush administration under FOIA, the Supreme Court has before it a case in which Judicial Watch and Sierra Club, an environmental group, are seeking the names of energy companies and officials who sat in on task force meetings and may have had a hand in the make-up of the administration’s energy policy. The task force was chaired by Vice President Dick Cheney.

The two groups and other critics contend that large Bush campaign contributors, such as former Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay, had a direct pipeline to the task force and unduly influenced the drafting of the energy policy. The Bush White House refused to turn over the sought-after information to the organizations on the grounds that it would encroach on the authority of the executive branch to obtain confidential information.

Before the high court in late April, Judicial Watch argued that the disclosure of the information was required under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), or open-meeting law, while U.S. Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson countered that the task force was exempt from FACA because it was comprised strictly of governmental employees (see Daily GPI, April 28). Olson further argued that the “separation of powers” clause in the Constitution shielded the executive branch from scrutiny in such matters by the courts or Congress. A ruling from the Supreme Court is expected before July.

©Copyright 2004 Intelligence Press Inc. All rights reserved. The preceding news report may not be republished or redistributed, in whole or in part, in any form, without prior written consent of Intelligence Press, Inc.