a panel of this court lacks authority to overrule a prior panel decision. For this reason, we also could not now overrule Webbe, as Citizens urges. 15 . In United States v. Poindexter, 732 F.Supp. 170 (D.D.C.1990), which was decided by the District Court for the District of Columbia, President Reagan was not the sitting president at the time he testified. Moreover, no reasons were given by the district court to explain its comment, in dicta, that it intended to release the videotape after the tape had been used at trial. Id. at 172 n. 2. We see no reasonable basis for reading into that decision the holding that the press had a common law right of access to the videotape of President Reagan's deposition. Cf. Application of American Broadcasting Cos., 537 F.Supp. 1168, 1172 (D.D.C.1982) (<HOLDING>). 16 . By contrast to the present case, we held
recognizing that common law agency principles extend the right to sue a principal that ratifies the illegal act of an agent holding that common law right does not extend to videotape of rule 15 deponents testimony holding that a videotape of a rule 15 deponents testimony is not a judicial record for purposes of broadcasters right of access because otherwise such deponents would be subject to exceptional treatment as compared with other witnesses holding that rule b attachment does not extend to afteracquired property recognizing that the right does not extend to committing perjury