Some courts have used a standard that balances the needs of the defendant against the interests of the government, and others have applied common standards of relevancy. The article assesses these conflicting approaches, arguing that judges should not be allowed to balance the parties' competing interests in the disclosure of classified information when they are ruling on relevance. Instead, the court should be allowed to balance competing interests when ruling on the adequacy of offered substitutes and stipulations. The article recommends that Congress amend CIPA so that courts will be able to separate relevance questions from disclosure questions for discovery and admissibility purposes, thereby isolating relevance determinations from governmental secrecy claims and ensuring that National security and due process concerns will be adequately accommodated. 135 footnotes.