Way back in 1954, the Supreme Court acknowledged the “informant’s privilege,” allowing the government to withhold the identities of behind-the-scene tipsters. More than a half-century later, that game has changed. Often invoking concerns about witness safety, the government is now concealing the names of even eyewitnesses to the charged crime. And sensitive to witness safety, our courts are inclined to aid-and-abet that concealment. What can we do? The federal rules regarding what is due, when, are fuzzy, and local discovery practice varies from district-todistrict. So this program doesn’t promise one-size-fits-all answers. And it’s not about early production of witness lists. Instead, it hopes to diagnose a problem: the government’s sometimes unconstitutional interference with the defense function. Acknowledging a difference between all that what we want and what we truly need, this program envisions a withinsession dialog about getting what we need.