One of the waivers the district attorney is seeking relates to e-mail messages and other material that Mr. Spitzer’s office turned over in response to a grand jury subpoena, an unusual move given the secrecy surrounding such proceedings.

The executive branch would also need to consider what precedent would be set by sweeping aside legal privileges that the Spitzer administration claimed. Doing so could also invite a suit from Mr. Spitzer.

Grand jury secrecy is not a political football. As Cuomo points out, citing a court opinion:

The Grand Jury has long been heralded as the shield of innocence . . . and as the guard of liberties of the people against the encroachments of unfounded accusations from any source. . . . Accordingly, secrecy has become a vital requisite of Grand Jury proceedings.

He concludes:

In short, the secrecy of the Grand Jury process must be preciously guarded, and the Governor does not have the legal right to waive that secrecy.... Again, only a court, and not the Governor, can make that determination.

Cuomo lists four alternatives to making the information public:

1. District Attorney Soares may obtain a court order authorizing disclosure of documents produced to the Grand Jury;
2. former Governor Spitzer may waive his claims of privilege;
3. the Senate may prevail in its litigation challenging the former Governor’s claim of privilege;
4. the Public Integrity Commission may issue a