USA v. Boston College (US Federal District Court, District Judge Young, 16 December 2011)

US Federal District Court: a) refuses application by academic institution to quash subpoena requesting confidential interviews; b) grants application for in camera review of relevant materials; and c) refuses application to intervene made by directors of oral history project. (Link to full text of ruling.)(Subsequent ruling.)

Application to quash subpoena – confidential interviews from oral history project  - whether subpoena “unreasonable or oppressive” – Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c)(2) – documents relating to interviews – confidentiality agreements with interviewees – request for documents relating to abduction of death in Northern Ireland – interviews with members of Provisional IRA – academic exercise – warning by college that interviews might not be confidential in face of court order – contract guaranteeing confidentiality “to the extent that American law allows” – subpoena issued pursuant to treaty between US and UK – treaty having force of law – “United Kingdom Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty” – text of treaty – laws of requested state – ambiguity in wording of treaty – discretion of court – Foreign Evidence Request Efficiency Act 2009 – whether conflict between treaty and 2009 legislation – discretion of court to review motion to quash subpoena – standard of review – comparison with review of grand jury subpoena – academic privilege and need for confidentiality – seriousness of relevant offences – harm to free flow of information – chilling effect – application to intervene by directors of project .