View source for Wilson v. Libby

{{Use mdy dates|date=February 2012}}{{italic title}}
{{Infobox U.S. Courts of Appeals case
  |Litigants=Wilson v. Libby
  |Court=[[United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit]]
  |CourtSeal=Seal of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.png
  |ArgueDate=May 9,
  |ArgueYear=2008
  |DecideDate=August 12,
  |DecideYear=2008
  |FullName=[[Valerie Plame Wilson]] and [[Joseph C. Wilson IV]] v. [[Lewis Libby|I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Jr.]], [[Karl Rove|Karl C. Rove]], [[Dick Cheney|Richard B. Cheney]], [[Richard Armitage (politician)|Richard L. Armitage]] and John Does Nos. 1–10
  |Citations=535 [[F.3d]] [https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20080812087 697]
  |Prior=[https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4205192/wilson-v-libby/ 1:06-cv-01258], 498 [[F. Supp. 2d]] [https://www.leagle.com/decision/2007572498fsupp2d741569 74] ([[United States District Court for the District of Columbia|D.D.C.]] 2007)
  |Subsequent=[[Certiorari|Cert.]] denied, {{ussc|557|919|2009|el=no}}.
  |Holding=
  |Judges=[[David B. Sentelle]], [[Karen L. Henderson]], [[Judith W. Rogers]]
  |Majority=Sentelle
  |JoinMajority=Henderson
  |ConcurrenceDissent=Rogers
  |LawsApplied=
  |keywords= 
}}
{{Plame affair}}
'''''Wilson v. Libby''''', 498 F. Supp. 2d 74 (D.D.C. 2007), affirmed, 535 F.3d 697 (D.C. Cir. 2008), was a civil [[lawsuit]] filed in the [[United States District Court for the District of Columbia|U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia]] on 13 July, 2006, by [[Valerie Plame]] and her husband, former Ambassador [[Joseph C. Wilson]], IV, against [[Richard Armitage (politician)|Richard Armitage]] (individually) for allegedly revealing her identity and thus irresponsibly infringing upon her Constitutional rights and against Vice President of the United States [[Dick Cheney]], [[Lewis Libby]], [[Karl Rove]], and the unnamed others (together) because the latter, in addition, allegedly "illegally conspired to reveal her identity."<ref name=Bloomberg> Cary O'Reilly, ([[Bloomberg L.P.]]), [https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a1.WTguNE05U&refer=home "Cheney, Rove, Libby Sued by Ex-CIA Agent Over Leak" (Update)], Bloomberg.com, last updated July 13, 2006, accessed May 5, 2007.</ref><ref name=Wapo>Eric M. Weiss and Charles Lane, [https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/13/AR2006071301092.html "Vice President Sued by Plame And Husband: Ex-CIA Officer Alleges Leak Of Her Name Was Retaliatory"], ''[[The Washington Post]]'', July 14, 2007, accessed May 5,.2007.</ref> The lawsuit was ultimately dismissed.

==Parties==
The plaintiffs in the suit are former CIA officer [[Valerie Plame|Valerie Plame Wilson]] and her husband [[Joseph C. Wilson|Joseph Wilson]].<ref name=FL>[http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/iraq/wilsonlibby71306cmp.html "Valerie Plame and Joseph Wilson Sue Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and Scooter Libby"]: "Valerie Plame Wilson, Joseph Wilson, IV v. I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, Karl C. Rove, Richard Cheney, and, as amended, John Does 1–10", [[FindLaw]], July 13, 2006, accessed May 5, 2007.</ref>

The defendants in the suit are [[Scooter Libby|I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby]], the Vice President's former [[Chief of staff (politics)|Chief of Staff]]; [[Karl Rove]], [[White House Chief of Staff]] to the [[President of the United States|President]]; [[Richard Armitage (politician)|Richard Armitage]], former [[United States Deputy Secretary of State]] (who was added to the complaint in September 2006<ref>"Amended Complaint" in Wilson v. Cheney (Civ. A. No. 06-1258 [JDB]), '[[Wikisource]]. Retrieved January 10, 2008.</ref>); and ten unnamed others.<ref name=Bloomberg/> Unlike their charges against Rove, Cheney, and Libby, "claiming that they had violated her constitutional rights and discredited her by disclosing that she was an undercover CIA operative," the Wilsons sued Armitage "for violating the 'Wilsons' constitutional right to privacy, Mrs. Wilson's constitutional right to property, and for committing the tort of publication of private facts.'"<ref name=CBSArmitageAdded>[[Melanie Sloan]], Executive Director, [[Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington]] (CREW), press release, as qtd. in [https://web.archive.org/web/20061022041524/http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/13/politics/main2006236.shtml "Armitage Added to Plame Law Suit"], [[CBS News]], September 13, 2006. Retrieved September 25, 2006.</ref>

==Dismissal==
[[United States District Court for the District of Columbia]] Judge [[John D. Bates]] dismissed the Wilsons' lawsuit on jurisdictional grounds on July 19, 2007, stating that the Wilsons had not shown that the case belonged in [[United States federal courts|federal court]].<ref name=APDimissed>[[Associated Press]], [https://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-07-19-plame-lawsuit_N.htm "Valerie Plame's Lawsuit Dismissed"], ''[[USA Today]]'', July 19, 2007. Retrieved July 19, 2007.</ref><ref>[http://us.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/19/cia.leak/index.html "Judge Tosses Out Ex-Spy's Lawsuit Against Cheney in CIA Leak Case"], [[CNN|CNN.com]], July 19, 2007. Retrieved July 19, 2007.</ref><ref name=Leonnigdism>[[Carol D. Leonnig]], [https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/19/AR2007071901395.html?hpid=topnews "Plame's Lawsuit Against Top Officials Dismissed"], ''[[The Washington Post]]'', July 20, 2007. Retrieved July 20, 2007.</ref><ref name=Bates>{{cite court |litigants=Wilson v. Libby |vol=498 |reporter=F. Supp. 2d |opinion=74 |pinpoint= |court=D.D.C. |date=2007 |url=https://www.leagle.com/decision/2007572498fsupp2d741569 |accessdate=2019-02-18 |quote=}}</ref> Bates also ruled that the court lacked jurisdiction over the claim because the couple had not yet exhausted their administrative remedies.<ref name=Leonnigdism/> Bates noted that "there can be no serious dispute that the act of rebutting public criticism, such as that levied by Mr. Wilson against the Bush administration's handling of prewar foreign intelligence, by speaking with members of the press is within the scope of defendants' duties as high-level Executive Branch officials," even if "the alleged means by which defendants chose to rebut Mr. Wilson's comments and attack his credibility" were "highly unsavory"; but Judge Bates also acknowledged that the lawsuit raised "important questions relating to the propriety of actions undertaken by our highest government officials."<ref name=ApuzzoDism>Qtd. in Matt Apuzzo ([[Associated Press]]), "[https://web.archive.org/web/20070930230536/http://www.denverpost.com/extremes/ci_6414426 "Plame Lawsuit Dismissed in CIA Leak Case"], ''[[The Denver Post]]'', July 19, 2007. Retrieved July 19, 2007.</ref>

==Appeal==
On July 20, 2007, the Wilsons and [[Melanie Sloan]], of [[Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington]] (CREW), which represents them, announced publicly that they had filed an appeal of the U.S. District Court's decision to dismiss their lawsuit,<ref name=WilsonsStatement>[http://www.wilsonsupport.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=0 "Statements and Responses: Statement on Ambassador Joseph and Valerie Wilson's Appeal"], The Joseph and Valerie Wilson Legal Support Trust, wilsonsupport.org, July 20, 2007, accessed June 10, 2008 [Updated version of site]. Cf. [http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/29517 "Statement on Ambassador Joseph and Valerie Wilsons' Appeal Filed on July 20"], [[Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington]] (CREW), July 20, 2007. Retrieved July 27, 2007.</ref><ref name=WilsonsOpposition>[http://www.citizensforethics.org/files//011607WilsonPlaintiffsOpposition.pdf "Legal Filings: Wilsons' Opposition to Defendants' and the United States' Motion to Dismiss"], The Joseph and Valerie Wilson Legal Support Trust, wilsonsupport.org, January 16, 2007. Retrieved June 10, 2008.</ref> which was heard on May 8, 2008.<ref name=Current>[http://www.wilsonsupport.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=31 "Legal Filings: Current Status of Civil Suit: Update on the Wilsons' Lawsuit"], The Joseph and Valerie Wilson Legal Support Trust, wilsonsupport.org, May 9, 2008. Retrieved June 10, 2008.</ref> On August 12, 2008, in a 2–1 decision, the three-judge panel of the [[United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit]] upheld the dismissal.<ref name=DeckerOReilly>Susan Decker and Cary O'Reilly, [https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.vwH.xyBcpY&refer=home# "Cheney, Rove, Libby Win Plame Suit Dismissal Appeal (Update2)"], [[Bloomberg L.P.|Bloomberg.com]], August 12, 2008. Retrieved August 13, 2008.</ref><ref name=DCCircuit>{{cite court |litigants=Wilson v. Libby |vol=535 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=697 |pinpoint= |court=D.C. Cir. |date=2008 |url=https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20080812087 |accessdate=2019-02-18 |quote=}}</ref> On behalf of the Wilsons, Sloan said that CREW "is considering asking the full D.C. Circuit to review the case and an appeal to the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]]."<ref name=DeckerOReilly/> Agreeing with the Bush administration, the Obama Justice Department argues the Wilsons have no legitimate grounds to sue. On the current justice department position, Sloan, stated: "We are deeply disappointed that the Obama administration has failed to recognize the grievous harm top Bush White House officials inflicted on Joe and Valerie Wilson. The government’s position cannot be reconciled with President Obama’s oft-stated commitment to once again make government officials accountable for their actions."<ref name=WilsonAppeal>[http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/39740 "Obama Administration Opposes Joe and Valerie Wilson's Request for Supreme Court Appeal in Suit Against Cheney, Rove, Libby and Armitage"], [[Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington]] (CREW), May 20, 2009, accessed May 22, 2009.</ref>

On June 21, 2009, the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]] refused to hear the appeal.<ref name=AppealDenied> [http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2009/06/supreme-court-will-not-revive-valerie-plame-lawsuit/97233 "Supreme Court will not revive Valerie Plame lawsuit"], ''[[Washington Examiner|WashingtonExaminer.com]]'', June 21, 2009. Retrieved May 26, 2012.</ref>

==See also==
*[[CIA leak grand jury investigation]]
*[[CIA leak scandal timeline]]
*[[Plame affair]]
*''[[United States v. Libby]]''

==Notes==
{{reflist|30em}}

==External links==
* {{caselaw source
 | case = ''Wilson v. Libby'', 535 F.3d 697 (D.C. Cir. 2008)
 | googlescholar = https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9102816748462448364
 | leagle =https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20080812087
 }}
*[http://members.cox.net/liinda/Plame_cheneyMTDismiss.htm "Defendant Vice President of the United States Richard B. Cheney's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint"] in ''Plame v. Cheney'' [''Wilson v. Cheney'']. In "Documents: Plame/Wilson Civil Case", members.cox.net, November 14, 2006. Accessed June 10, 2008.
*[http://www.wilsonsupport.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=25&Itemid=33 "Legal Filings"]. [http://wilsonsupport.org/ The Joseph and Valerie Wilson Legal Support Trust], wilsonsupport.org. Accessed June 10, 2008.  (Contains Wilsons' legal motions and other legal filings.)
*[http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/iraq/documents.html#plame "Special Coverage: Iraq Aftermath"] at [[FindLaw]] (legal documents). Accessed May 5, 2007.

[[Category:2007 in United States case law]]
[[Category:2008 in United States case law]]
[[Category:United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit cases]]
[[Category:United States District Court for the District of Columbia cases]]
[[Category:Plame affair]]