WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights Under Law has filed a brief here April on behalf of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, opposing the federal government’s request to unseal and publicly release FBI files on Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
The Lawyers’ Committee argued the early release of these surveillance reports, created through years of illegal FBI spying on Dr. King and the SCLC, would violate attorney-client privilege, disrespect the wishes of the King family, and risk spreading unreliable and damaging information.
The LCCRUL stressed in the brief that there is no valid legal basis for the government’s attempt to unseal the FBI’s surveillance record on Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
According the LCCRUL, the files are currently under a court-ordered seal, placed nearly 50 years ago, and the government has failed to present any legal justification that would allow the court to overturn this decision.
The government’s justification that “the records have remained shielded from the public for long enough” is not a valid legal standard and does not warrant breaching a longstanding judicial order, as noted by the Lawyers’ Committee in the brief.
Echoing that sentiment, Damon T. Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee, said, “It is seemingly unprecedented for the FBI to publish surveillance records of private citizens. This kind of violation of rights simply does not happen, and for very good reason. Releasing such records to the public serves no legitimate interest whatsoever of the American people.”
The LCCRUL argued in the brief that the government’s rationale misrepresents the scope of the executive order, as the files stem from illegal surveillance that took place from 1963 to 1968.
The files focus on Dr. King’s home, SCLC offices, and hotel rooms where SCLC leaders met rather than on the circumstances of his assassination in Memphis in April 1968, explains the Lawyers’ Committee.
Additionally, the LCCRUL added a declaration from Martin Luther King III, Dr. King’s son, where he states, “These surveillance recordings of our home in Atlanta have nothing to do with our father’s murder in Memphis, hundreds of miles away.”
Hewitt reminds the court the government’s efforts “challenge a shameful effort to unseal and publicize these decades-old illegal surveillance files,” and that these violations occurred “not because SCLC or Dr. King posed a threat to our nation, but because they were a powerful force in the fight for justice and equity.”
Dr. King’s children, Bernice King and Martin Luther King III both noted releasing these surveillance tapes would be “traumatic” to their family’s well-being, reports the Lawyers’ Committee in the brief.
“I wholeheartedly disagree [with the release],” says Bernice King, who further explains her belief that the files should “be permanently sealed or destroyed, due to the illegal incursion and invasion of [her] father’s privacy,” according to the Lawyers’ Committee brief.
The LCCRUL details in the brief that surveillance targeted spaces where Dr. King and SCLC officials met with their attorneys, capturing confidential information and violating critical protections of projections of attorney-client privilege.
“Respect the wishes of the King family, and allow Dr. King’s legacy to stand on the strength of his words, the merit of his actions, and his relevance as an inspiring figure in the ongoing fight for racial and economic justice,” added Hewitt to the Lawyers’ Committee.
DeMark Liggins, national president of the SCLC, said, “Attempts to unseal these files don’t serve justice; they serve to sensationalize and distort. We stand firm in protecting the truth of the SCLC and Dr. King’s mission.”
The Lawyers’ Committee cites historical records from the brief showing the FBI’s targeted efforts to portray Dr. King as an opportunist, referencing FBI memos that explicitly stated plans to expose Dr. King at the “proper time” as someone “exploiting the racial situation for personal gain.”
Martin Luther King III, through the Lawyers’ Committee brief, cautions “some, perhaps many, of the recordings may be fake” and have never been properly authenticated.
Hewitt maintains, said LCCRUL, that Dr. King’s legacy “stands on the strength of his words, the merit of his actions,” not on distorted, illegally obtained recordings.
