Biden Abandons Legal Fight to Keep Ghostwriter Interview Recordings Secret

Joe Biden has dropped his legal bid to prevent the public release of private interview recordings and transcripts conducted with his memoir ghostwriter, clearing the way for the files to be turned over to congressional investigators and a conservative watchdog group.

Attorneys for the former president filed a notice of voluntary dismissal on Friday, ending a high-stakes dispute over the audio files. The move comes less than a week after a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected Biden’s request to block the disclosure. The appellate court had paused its ruling until August 3 to allow Biden time to seek a rehearing or petition the Supreme Court, but he chose to bypass those options.

In a 2-1 decision issued on Monday, the three-judge panel ruled that there was a “substantial” public interest in releasing the material, affirming a June decision by U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich. Circuit Judge Florence Pan, a Biden appointee, dissented from the majority, arguing that Biden maintained a significant privacy interest in the personal conversations. The appeal was also heard by Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan, an Obama appointee, and Judge Gregory Katsas, a Trump appointee.

The recordings were originally made in 2016 and 2017 at Biden’s home by ghostwriter Mark Zwonitzer, who collaborated with him on the memoirs Promises to Keep and Promise Me, Dad. Biden’s legal team argued the discussions were highly personal and intended to remain confidential.

The audio files became a central point of political contention after they were obtained by Special Counsel Robert Hur during his investigation into Biden’s handling of classified documents from his time as a senator and vice president. Although Hur concluded his investigation without recommending criminal charges, his final report characterized Biden as a well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory. This description prompted congressional Republicans to demand the raw audio recordings to independently assess the special counsel’s findings. While the Justice Department previously argued the records were exempt under public records laws, the recent court rulings forced a shift in the legal battle.