Good question. But in appeal, wouldn't those appealing need necessarily to look at more than just the documents that sweeney allowed?
As in, an interesting scenario would be; our plaintiffs lose but appeal. Couldn't they then claim "we would have won the case if only we had been allowed to look at certain documents the gvt put under executive privilege." I know most appeals don't deal with new evidence. But I wonder how that would be handled.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
