Hillary Clinton Has 30 Days to Answer 25 Queries on E-Mails

  • Judicial Watch sends Democratic nominee questions in lawsuit
  • Group pursuing records from Clinton’s time as top diplomat

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton speaks during a campaign event at the North Carolina State Fairgrounds on June 22, 2016, in Raleigh, North Carolina.

Photographer: Sara D. Davis/Getty Images

Hillary Clinton has 30 days to provide written answers to 25 questions stemming from her use of a private e-mail server during her four years as U.S. secretary of state.

Among the questions, drawn up by the watchdog group Judicial Watch with the permission of a federal judge, the Democratic presidential nominee is asked to explain under oath why and how that private e-mail system was created, when she decided to use it for official business, if she understood such messages would be subject to disclosure under the federal Freedom of Information Act and whether anyone warned her about the risks of hacking.

Clinton has until Sept. 29 to answer the questions, according to Judicial Watch, which has filed several lawsuits seeking work-related e-mails and other documents from Clinton and her aides at the State Department.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan gave the group permission to question Clinton in an Aug. 19 court order denying its bid to sit her down for face-to-face questioning as her race for the White House against Republican nominee Donald Trump enters its post-Labor Day home stretch.

Sullivan had previously let Judicial Watch lawyers question other Clinton-era State Department aides including former Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills and top deputy Huma Abedin in a case seeking documents relating to Abedin’s overlapping employment at State, the Clinton Foundation and an outside consulting firm.

Brian Fallon, Clinton’s campaign spokesman, didn’t immediately respond to an e-mailed request for comment. In an Aug. 21 interview on CNN’s “State of the Union” program, Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said that once Judicial Watch’s inquiries were received, “the secretary will get to work right away on answering them.”

The case is Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of State, 13-cv-1363, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).

— With assistance by Ben Brody

    Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal.