A federal judge in the United States has ruled against former President Joe Biden's attempt to prevent the release of audio recordings he made with his ghostwriter, dealing a significant blow to the Democrat's privacy claims. U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich, appointed to the bench by President Donald Trump in 2017, ruled on Friday that the public interest in the material outweighed Biden's right to privacy, clearing the way for the recordings to be handed over to the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank based in Washington.
The recordings stem from Biden's collaboration with ghostwriter Mark Zwonitzer on his 2017 memoir, Promise Me, Dad: A Year of Hope, Hardship, and Purpose, which Biden wrote after leaving office as vice president. They came into the Justice Department's possession in 2023, when special counsel Robert Hur was appointed to investigate whether Biden had improperly retained classified documents during his time as a senator and vice president. Hur ultimately concluded that criminal charges were not warranted, partly citing a shortage of evidence and partly reasoning that jurors were likely to view Biden as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory" — a characterisation that intensified scrutiny over his fitness for office. As part of that inquiry, Hur used the recordings to assess whether Biden had drawn on sensitive government information for his memoir, and cited them as evidence that Biden "appeared to have significant limitations" in his memory.
Biden's lawyers argued that every American, including a former vice president, retains a right to privacy in personal conversations held at home, and that releasing the materials would cause irreparable reputational harm. Biden also raised concerns that the recordings included discussions of sensitive personal matters, such as the death of his son Beau Biden. Friedrich acknowledged in her 26-page ruling that disclosure risked damaging Biden's privacy interests and reputation, but found those harms were not irreparable. She also noted that the administration had redacted the most sensitive personal material, including any references to illness, death, or non-public family members.
The case carries broader political significance. Biden's former Democratic administration had refused to release the transcripts to congressional Republicans, a standoff that led the Republican-led House to hold then-Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt. After Trump returned to the White House, his Justice Department authorised the release, and a Heritage Foundation staffer formally requested the records under the Freedom of Information Act. Trump has repeatedly pointed to questions about Biden's age and mental acuity — Biden was 82 when he left office in January 2025, the oldest sitting president in U.S. history — as grounds for reviewing decisions made during his predecessor's term. Biden's dramatic withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race, following a widely criticised debate performance, had already made his cognitive fitness a dominant political issue.
Representatives for Biden did not immediately comment on the ruling, but asked the court to bar the release of the material while they pursue an appeal. The Democrat is widely expected to challenge the decision at a higher court, meaning the recordings may not become public immediately.