President Bill Clinton may be in the hot seat again for violating the Privacy Act, but some ISU faculty members don’t think much will come of the investigation.

A district judge ruled in late March that Clinton violated the Privacy Act by releasing letters written to him by Kathleen Willey, a White House volunteer who in 1998 accused the president of groping her in the Oval Office. She alleged the unwanted advances happened in 1993.

Judge Royce C. Lamberth also said Clinton’s top aides knew he was subject to the act “yet chose to violate its provisions.” However, last week the Justice Department asked the federal appeals court to dismiss the ruling.

“Most people that I’ve talked with say nothing is going to happen with this case,” said Steffen Schmidt, professor of political science. “Nobody is particularly interested in following up on it. Members of Congress have been trying to get rid of Clinton for years but haven’t succeeded.”

The Justice Department is arguing to the U.S. Court of Appeals that the president is not subject to the provisions of the Privacy Act, which is designed to protect individuals who deal with the federal government.

The Privacy Act prohibits federal agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service and Central Intelligence Agency from releasing personal letters sent to the government.

“The Justice Department is arguing that the office should be treated like the judicial system and Congress itself who aren’t subject to the act,” said Barbara Mack, associate professor of journalism and mass communication law. “They are saying the law applies to agencies, and the president is not an agency; he is the executive officer of the government.”

The letters, released by White House aides in 1998, implied that Willey remained friendly with Clinton, including one that thanked the president for his condolences after the death of her husband.

“President Clinton wanted to take the shock value out of the Willey ’60 Minutes’ taping by releasing the reports,” Schmidt said. “Her appearance then was old news because the new news was the relevance of the documents. It was a way for Clinton to defend himself.”

If Clinton is in violation, he will face a fine, Mack said. The decision by the court will be reached after his term is over.

“[Willey] could file a civil lawsuit against him, too,” she said, “but I haven’t seen any evidence that she would do it.”