• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« This Week in The National Law Journal | Main | Senate Set to Vote on Nominee for 5th Circuit »

February 14, 2011



I am at a loss to understand this "rule." If the provision is 18 U.S.C. 207(c), then a brief submitted to a *court* is not "a communication to or appearance before any officer or employee of [his former] department or agency."

Court briefs are not communications or appearances to/before DOJ; they are communications to the court.

On DOJ's theory, Tribe could not sue DOJ after leaving its employ, because he would have to serve the complaint on DOJ and that would be a "communication" or "appearance."


This is a standard rule applicable to all former DOJ employees, and in my experience, all former DOJ employees understand that the precludes appearing on a brief in a matter in which DOJ is involved. That Tribe did not understand that rule is rather remarkable.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad