On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Before Merritt*, Jones** and Guy***, Circuit Judges. BY THE COURT: Upon consideration of the Emergency Motion for Stay Pending Appeal, the stay entered by the district court on September 21, 1987 is extended until October 30, 1987. *Honorable Gilbert S. Merritt, U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation. **Honorable Nathaniel R. Jones, U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation. ***Honorable Ralph B. Guy, U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Before Merritt*, Jones** and Guy***, Circuit Judges. 00T 21887 TE BY THE COURT: The stay pending appeal previously entered by the Court is hereby extended until further order. *Honorable Gilbert S. Merritt, U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation. **Honorable Nathaniel R. Jones, U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation. ***Honorable Ralph B. Guy, U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS No. 87-5857 In Re GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS On Appeal from the United States District Court RESPONSE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE I. INTRODUCTION Appellant Judge Alcee Hastings has filed a notice of appeal from two orders of the District Court of the Southern District of Florida and an Emergency Motion to Extend Stay Pending Disposition of Appeal. These challenged Orders grant the Judiciary Committee of the United States House of Representatives access to the records of the grand jury that investigated and indicted Judge Hastings, for use in the House's impeachment proceedings against Judge Hastings. The District Court's September 21 Order also declined to authorize release of the grand jury record to Judge Hastings, though it explicitly granted authority to the House to make any disclosure it deems appropriate to Judge Hastings. Finally, it denied Judge Hastings' request that the entire grand jury record be released to the public. The Department of Justice takes no position on the question of the Emergency Stay. However, this Court has expressed its intention to consider the merits of this matter simultaneously with the Emergency Motion. On the merits, the Department of Justice has no objection to disclosure to the Judiciary Committee, and supports the request of the Committee, having concluded that disclosure is appropriate in these circumstances. The Department of Justice opposes wholesale disclosure of the grand jury materials to Judge Hastings, though it recognizes that eventual disclosure of specific portions of the grand jury record may be appropriate at some point in the future. This disclosure may be necessary to afford Judge Hastings a fair opportunity to respond to any specific charges that may eventually be made against him in the course of this impeachment proceeding, a contingency which is amply provided for in the District Court's order. On the issue of public release of the grand jury materials, the United States has strongly objected to any such release; the District Court was clearly correct in its ruling that Rule 6 (e), Fed. R. Crim. P., makes no provision for such disclosure and that no showing of such extraordinary circumstances as might warrant disclosure beyond the terms of Rule 6(e) has been made. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE In 1981, after investigation, a grand jury in the Southern District of Florida indicted United States District Judge Alcee 3 Hastings for conspiring with William Borders, Jr., to solicit a bribe to influence a judicial decision. After Judge Hastings took an interlocutory appeal to challenge his indictment, the trials were severed, and Borders was thereafter convicted. United States v. Borders, 693 F.2d 1318 (11th Cir. 1982). Judge Hastings lost his appeal, was subsequently tried, and was acquitted on February 6, 1983. On March 17, 1983, a complaint was filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit by two federal district judges, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $372 (c) and the relevant rules for the Conduct of Complaint Proceedings under 28 U.S.C. $372 (c), as promulgated by the Judicial Council of the Eleventh Circuit. The complaint alleged that Judge Hastings had engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts and had violated the canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct for United States Judges. The complaint was based in part on the alleged conspiracy for which Judge Hastings had been tried and acquitted. After investigation, which included examination of the grand jury records, see In re Petition to Inspect and Copy Grand Jury Materials, 735 F.2d 1261 (11th Cir. 1984), the Judicial Council of the Eleventh Circuit certified to the Judicial Conference of the United States, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $372 (c) (7) (B), its conclusion that Judge Hastings had engaged in conduct which might constitute grounds for impeachment. The Judicial Conference concurred, and on March 17, 1987, certified this conclusion to the United States House of Representatives, in |