华盛顿电 —— 联邦上诉法院驳回乔・拜登提出的禁令申请，拒绝阻止对外公布一批音频录音以及文字笔录。这些材料记录了拜登当选总统前，与回忆录代笔作家的访谈对话。
哥伦比亚特区联邦巡回上诉法院由三名法官组成的合议庭以意见分歧作出裁决。法院将判决暂缓生效至 8 月 3 日，给拜登留出时间，考虑是否继续提起上诉。
合议庭于周一晚间以 2 票赞成、1 票反对作出裁定，认定公开这批拜登希望保密的材料具备 “重大公共利益”。多数意见同时指出，可以对录音内容进行删减处理，以此保护拜登隐私。
裁决文书写道：“我们判定，公开经过删减的材料，即便仍会对个人隐私造成一定侵扰，但这一影响很可能不足以压倒公开材料所承载的公共利益。”
由民主党人拜登提名上任的弗洛伦斯・潘法官撰写异议意见。她认为，拜登拥有 “重大隐私权益”，应当对谈话内容予以保密。
她写道：“相关谈话发生在拜登家中，政府是在一项刑事调查过程中获取这些录音，但该调查最终并未提起正式指控。”
参与本次上诉审理的另外两名法官分别是巡回法院首席法官斯里・斯里尼瓦桑、格雷戈里・卡察斯。斯里尼瓦桑由民主党总统奥巴马提名，奥巴马当年选择拜登担任副总统;卡察斯由共和党总统特朗普提名，特朗普在 2020 年大选中不敌拜登，并于 2024 年再度入主白宫。
马克・兹沃尼策曾协助拜登撰写两本回忆录：2007 年出版的《信守承诺》与 2017 年的《答应我，儿子》。2016 年至 2017 年间，兹沃尼策前往拜登家中对他开展访谈。拜登的律师表示，对话内容坦诚、涉及私人话题，原本约定不予对外公开。
这批录音由特别检察官罗伯特・赫尔获取。赫尔当时负责调查拜登在特拉华州担任联邦参议员以及出任奥巴马政府副总统期间，不当留存涉密文件一事。赫尔决定不对时任总统的拜登提起刑事指控后，国会共和党人要求司法部交出这批材料。
拜登随即提起诉讼，寻求法院颁布临时禁令，阻止特朗普政府执掌的司法部将录音移交国会以及保守派智库传统基金会。拜登执政时期，司法部曾主张，依据公共档案相关法律，这批录音免于对外公开。
早在 6 月，由特朗普提名的联邦地区法官达布尼・弗里德里希作出一审判决，认定材料蕴含的公共利益高于拜登的隐私权。拜登不服判决，向上诉法院提起上诉。
潘法官在异议意见中指出，合议庭拒绝拜登在上诉程序进行期间申请临时禁令，实质上等同于裁定材料应当立刻对外公开。
她写道：“如此一来，本案诉讼本身也就失去意义。”
Appeals court rejects Biden bid to block release of ghostwriter interview recordings
WASHINGTON --A federal appeals court hasrejected a requestby Joe Biden to block the release of audio recordings and transcripts of his interviews with a memoir ghostwriter before he waselected president.
A divided three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit suspended its decision until Aug. 3 to allow more time for Biden to consider another appeal.
The panel's 2-1 ruling late Monday found there is a “substantial” public interest in disclosing the material that Biden wants to keep under wraps. Redactions to the recordings would help protect Biden's privacy, the majority noted.
“We conclude that any remaining incursion on personal privacy from disclosure of the now-redacted materials likely does not outweigh the public interest in disclosure,” the ruling says.
Judge Florence Pan, who was nominated by Biden, a Democrat, wrote a dissenting opinion in which she said Biden has shown a “substantial privacy interest” in keeping the material hidden.
“The conversations at issue took place in Biden’s home, and the recordings of them were obtained by the government in the course of a criminal investigation that did not lead to an indictment,” she wrote.
The appeal also was heard by D.C. Circuit Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan and Judge Gregory Katsas. Srinivasan was nominated by President Barack Obama, a Democrat who chose Biden as his vice president. Katsas was nominated by President Donald Trump, a Republican who lost to Biden in 2020 but was elected again to the White House in 2024.
Mark Zwonitzer, whoworked with Biden on two memoirs, 2007’s “Promises to Keep” and 2017's “Promise Me, Dad,” interviewed him at his home in 2016 and 2017. Biden’s lawyers say the conversations were candid, personal and intended to remain private.
The recordings were obtained byspecial counsel Robert Hur, who investigated Biden'shandling of classified documentsfrom his time as a senator from Delaware and as Obama's vice president. Republicans in Congress demanded the material after Hur declined to file charges against the then-president.
Biden suedand sought an injunction to prevent the Justice Department under Trump from releasing the recordings to Congress and the conservative Heritage Foundation. The department previously argued that the recordings were exempt from disclosure under public records law.
Biden appealed after U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich, who was nominated by Trump, ruled in June that the public interest in the material outweighed whatever privacy rights Biden had.
Pan noted that the majority is effectively ruling in favor of immediately disclosing the material by denying Biden's request for an injunction pending appeal.
“That, of course, will moot this case,” she wrote.
