Trump Administration officials, including Jared Kushner, former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, along with Trump friend and businessman Thomas Barrack were reportedly involved in the “Middle East Marshall Plan” to sell nuclear technology outside of the legally required process to Saudi Arabia. CREW is representing the Government Accountability Project in a suit challenging six agencies’ failure to produce documentation regarding the plan.

Kushner, Flynn and Barrack promoted a proposal sponsored by Flynn’s former employer International Peace Power and Prosperity (IP3) that would have transferred sensitive nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia outside of the process required by the Atomic Energy Act. The Atomic Energy Act is intended to ensure that countries receiving nuclear technology will not use it to create nuclear weapons. Officials at the National Security Council advised against this plan because of Flynn’s conflict of interest and potential legal violations. The plan would grant IP3 billions of dollars in government contracts. Barrack reportedly considered buying a stake in a nuclear reactor producer to benefit from this deal.

Government Accountability Project filed Freedom of Information Act requests in August and September of 2018 for all relevant communications regarding the plan and efforts by the Trump Administration to reassign or remove whistleblowers who raised concerns. To date, none of the six agencies has provided Government Accountability Project any documents. The release of these documents would help the public evaluate whether national security is being put at risk for the personal gain of Trump allies. 

Lawsuit Documents

  • February 22, 2019
  • May 24, 2019
  • Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of CIA's Motion for Summary Judgement - November 1, 2019
  • November 1, 2019
  • November 1, 2019
  • Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant CIA's Motion for Summary Judgement - November 15, 2019  
  • November 15, 2019
  • November 15, 2019
  • Memorandum in Support of CIA's Motion for Summary Judgement - July 24, 2020
  • Reply in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgement - August 7, 2020
  • September 1, 2020
  • September 4, 2020
  • May 7, 2021
  • July 7, 2021
  • March 2, 2022
  • March 2, 2022
  • September 30, 2022

Read More in Lawsuits