External e-mails sent from Dr. Anthony Fauci and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre are not covered by executive privilege and must be produced in a federal civil action.

The case, brought on behalf of the states of Missouri and Louisiana (along with a handful of other plaintiffs) alleges that President Joe Biden and other governmental officials, including Fauci and Jean-Pierre, have colluded with and/or coerced social media companies to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints and content on social media by labeling the content “disinformation,” misinformation” and “malinformation.” As part of the discovery in the case, the plaintiffs sought email communications between Fauci and Jean-Pierre and various social media platforms. Fauci and Jean-Pierre objected to producing any such documents on the basis of executive privilege and on the ground that fulfilling the request would be “unduly burdensome and disproportional to the needs of the case.”

The court rejected the undue burden argument, noting that “the requested information is obviously very relevant to Plaintiffs’ claims. Dr. Fauci’s communications would be relevant to Plaintiffs’ allegations in reference to alleged suppression of speech relating to the lab-leak theory of COVID-19’s origin, and to alleged suppression of speech about the efficiency of masks and COVID-19 lockdowns. Jean-Pierre’s communications as White House Press Secretary could be relevant to all of Plaintiffs’ examples.”

As to the executive privilege argument, the plaintiffs made the decision much easier by agreeing that they were only interested in external communications between Fauci and/or Jean-Pierre and third-party social media platforms, and were not seeking any internal communications. As the court noted, “[t]he White House has waived its claim of privilege in relation to specific documents that it voluntarily revealed to third parties outside the White House.” In other words, you can’t claim a privilege if you have already disclosed the information.

Executive privilege has been in the news a lot lately. This case demonstrates the limits of the privilege. It exists to shield what the President’s advisors tell him. It doesn’t shield what the President or his advisors say to third parties. The old playground rule of “no take-backs” seems to be applicable to the government as well.

Jack Greiner is a partner at the Graydon law firm in Cincinnati. He represents Enquirer Media in First Amendment and media issues.

This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Strictly Legal: No executive privilege for Dr. Anthony Fauci