Intelligence. Accountability. Analysis.
Est. 2022 · Washington, D.C.
The Congressional Times
We follow the data, not the narrative
◆ Live Intelligence
Loading...
Analysis Loading today's analysis...
Legal Intelligence

Federal Appeals Court Rules Against Biden's Bid to Block Ghostwriter Audio Release

Federal Appeals Court Rules Against Biden's Bid to Block Ghostwriter Audio Release

The ruling tests the boundaries of former officeholders' privacy interests against statutory public-records obligations, with a final outcome pending an Aug. 3 deadline.

Gab-E Intelligence Platform · July 21, 2026

A divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled on July 21, 2026, that former President Joe Biden's privacy claims do not outweigh what the court described as a 'substantial' public interest in releasing audio recordings and transcripts of interviews Biden conducted with his longtime ghostwriter, according to reporting by the New York Post citing the court's decision. The recordings were gathered during Special Counsel Robert Hur's investigation into Biden's handling of classified documents after he left the vice presidency.

The appellate panel denied Biden's motion to block the release of the material, which includes audio and written transcripts from interviews between Biden and his ghostwriter. The court's ruling did not use the word 'unlawful' in its public-interest balancing test; rather, it weighed Biden's asserted privacy interests against the public's right to access government investigative materials under applicable federal records law. The court's opinion — the full text of which is available through the federal PACER court filing system under the relevant docket — constitutes a majority ruling, with at least one dissenting judge, according to the same report.

To preserve Biden's ability to seek further review, the court suspended its decision until August 3, 2026, giving his legal team a window to appeal to the full appellate court or petition the U.S. Supreme Court for an emergency stay. The Special Counsel's report on Biden's classified-documents handling was publicly released in February 2024 and is available on the Department of Justice website; however, the underlying audio recordings and ghostwriter interview transcripts were not released at that time and have been the subject of ongoing litigation.

Special Counsel Robert Hur was appointed under 28 C.F.R. § 600.1 and submitted his final report to Attorney General Merrick Garland in early 2024. Hur declined to recommend criminal charges against Biden, citing factors including Biden's age and memory, as stated in the publicly available DOJ report. The ghostwriter interviews were conducted as part of that investigation into documents found at Biden's Wilmington, Delaware, home and a Washington, D.C., office.

What remains unknown as of publication is the specific legal theory under which the appellate panel found public interest to be 'substantial,' the identity of the dissenting judge(s), and whether Biden's team will file a further appeal before the August 3 suspension expires. The full written opinion, once posted to PACER or the court's public docket, would answer those questions. It is also not yet known whether the Department of Justice intends to release the recordings immediately upon the suspension lifting, or whether additional administrative steps would be required.

Today's Analysis
Loading...
Latest Intelligence
Congressional Intelligence
Loading...
Financial Intelligence
Loading...
Geopolitical Intelligence
Loading...
Follow the MoneyGab-E Political Intelligence Investigation
Loading...
Opinion & Analysis
Loading...
Archive
Loading...
About
Our Mission

We Follow the Data, Not the Narrative

The Congressional Times exists because public records are public — and the analysis built from them should not be exclusive to those who can afford $60,000-a-year intelligence subscriptions.

Every story published in The Congressional Times is sourced to a verifiable public record: a court filing, a Senate lobbying disclosure, an FEC contribution record, a USASpending contract, or a verified news report. We state our sources inline. We show our math. When we are wrong, we say so publicly.

We do not editorialize in news coverage. We do not use loaded language. Both political parties are held to identical standards.

The Follow the Money investigations are the heart of this publication. Each begins with Gab-E Political Intelligence running against 10+ million government records before a single word of editorial is written.

Powered by Gab-E, an elite global intelligence platform built to democratize political and financial intelligence.

Editorial Policy
Editorial Standards & Corrections Policy

How We Source, Verify, and Correct Our Work

Every factual claim in a Congressional Times story is checked against a primary source: a government filing, a court record, a direct quote, before publication. When a claim can't be verified or doesn't hold up as originally reported, we drop it or reframe it. We do not publish disputed claims as settled fact.

When we get it wrong: we correct the story directly, note the correction and date at the bottom of the piece, and update the record. We do not quietly edit and move on.

Bylines: stories with a named byline are written and fact-checked by that person. Stories without a byline are sourced from Gab-E Political Intelligence, our automated research platform, and are labeled as such.

Ownership: The Congressional Times is published by Gab-E Holdings LLC. Gab-E, our intelligence platform, powers our sourcing and research pipeline.

Corrections or concerns: support@gab-e.com