06_hillary_clinton_security_gty_1160.jpg

The State Department is proposing that a federal judge postpone a politically sensitive decision on whether to require Hillary Clinton to submit to a court-ordered deposition about her private email set-up as she enters a critical phase of her campaign for the White House.

Justice Department lawyers representing State are still urging U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan to deny a request from the conservative group Judicial Watch to depose the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee and two other witnesses in connection with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.

However, in a new court filing Friday, State says Sullivan could put off a decision on further depositions because State has been promised more Clinton emails shortly from the FBI and those records could contain information Judicial Watch is looking for.

“The requested depositions are also not needed or appropriate at this time because State has agreed to search the ‘several thousand work-related emails’ recovered by the FBI during its investigation into Secretary Clinton’s email server, for records responsive to Plaintiff’s FOIA request,” Justice Department lawyers wrote. “This was the ultimate relief Plaintiff sought when it moved for discovery—a point Judicial Watch does not deny.”

Attorneys for Clinton made a similar point in their own court filing Friday, although they proposed only denying Judicial Watch’s request to depose Clinton, not delaying a decision on it.

“Judicial Watch has argued that the Department’s search was inadequate because it did not acquire and search certain sources of Secretary Clinton’s e-mail. The FBI will provide to the Department e-mail it has retrieved from those sources, and the Department intends to search it for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s request,” Clinton’s lawyers wrote. “Judicial Watch thus will be obtaining its requested relief. In this circumstance, there is no need for discovery, and permitting Judicial Watch to depose a former Cabinet Secretary would be futile and inappropriate.”

Judicial Watch has called the possibility of State getting records from the FBI “irrelevant” to its request to depose Clinton, but the new State filing argues that shows what the group is really seeking is not the records at issue in the FOIA suit but the chance to put the Democratic presidential hopeful under oath.

“Plaintiff’s statement…strongly suggests that Plaintiff is seeking discovery for discovery’s sake,” Justice Department lawyers said.

State first raised the possibility of deferring a decision on a Clinton deposition in a court filing earlier this week, but at that time did not have an official indication from the FBI that additional records would be turned over to State. Now, an FBI official has pledged to do that, although the timing and volume of records involved is uncertain.

Sullivan has scheduled a hearing Monday morning on the issue of a potential Clinton deposition. The judge has ordered the government to be prepared to say at that time how long it will take to search the records the FBI is turning over to State.

The FOIA lawsuit where Clinton’s deposition has been requested relates to records of Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s employment arrangements involving State and outside entities. Those records are likely to be a small fraction, if any of what the FBI has recovered.

However, State has already pledged to process for release under FOIA all federal records in the additional emails, just as it did with the original batch of about 54,000 pages of messages Clinton turned over to the department in late 2014. Other pending FOIA lawsuits would likely force State to process the newly-obtained emails regardless of the agency’s wishes.

It’s unclear how long a delay would result if the judge does put off a decision on a Clinton deposition. In its filing Friday, State said it would not “necessarily” have to wait to process all the newly-provided emails before doing the Abedin-related search at issue in the case before Sullivan.