The redaction of Judge Reggie Walton’s entire Financial Disclosure Statement

The redaction of Judge Reggie Walton’s entire Financial Disclosure Statement appears to be in

violation of the Ethics in Government Act. The Ethics in Government Act requires that Federal Judges

file a yearly financial disclosure statement with the NIKE SHOX Judicial Conference as a check on

conflicts of interest. A disclosure may be redacted only to the extent necessary to protect the

individual who filed the report and for as long as the danger to such individual exists. The Financial

Disclosure Statement filed by Judge Reggie Walton in 2003 redacts all information except for the date

of the filing and Walton’s name. This is highly unusual. According to a recent GAO Report, less than

one percent of judges on average request complete redaction of their financial disclosure each year.

For Judge Reggie Walton’s 2003 Financial Disclosure, Click Here [.pdf]. For the request letter sent to

the NIKE SHOX Judicial Conference on March 6, 2006, asking for the release of Judge Walton’s

unredacted financial disclosure statement Click Here [.pdf].

In July 2004, Judge Reggie Walton disposed of Edmonds’ First Amendment case on the basis of the

government’s assertion of State Secrets Privilege. On the same day as the decision, Judge Walton

quashed a subpoena for Edmonds’ deposition by attorneys representing over 1,000 family members who

lost love ones during the terrorist attacks on 9/11. In limiting the deposition in the case, Burnett et

al. v. Al Baraka Investment & Development Corp., Judge Walton prevented the 9/11 attorneys from asking

a majority of the proposed questions related to the attacks. These included even the most mundane

questions, such as:

• When & where were you born?

• Where did you go to school?

• What languages do you speak?

• What did you focus your studies on in school?

• In what capacity have you been employed by the United States Government?