May 28, 2024: Court Sides With West Virginia TV Station Over Records on Top Official’s Firing
A termination letter involving a former top official at the now-defunct agency that ran West Virginia’s foster care and substance use support services is public information, a state appeals court ruled this week, siding with the television station that was denied the letter.
The public interest in the firing of former Department of Health and Human Resources Deputy Secretary Jeremiah Samples — who was the second highest-ranking official in the state’s largest agency — outweighs concerns about privacy violations, West Virginia Intermediate Court of Appeals Chief Judge Thomas E. Scarr said.
“Public employees have reduced privacy interests in records relating to their performance—especially when the records relate to the conduct of high-ranking officials,” he wrote in a decision released Thursday, reversing a Kanawha County Circuit Court decision from last year.
Jan. 8, 2024: Newspaper Sues City for Police Records, Mayor Directs ‘Immediate Steps’ for Response
A Kentucky newspaper has sued the state’s biggest city to get access to police records cited in a federal investigation.
The Courier Journal reported on Monday that it filed a lawsuit against Louisville Metro Government after the city’s police department failed to respond to a request for search warrant applications cited in a Justice Department report.
The Kentucky Open Records Act gives agencies five business days to respond to such requests, but the newspaper reports it submitted a request four months ago.
The city’s only response was a Sept. 6 message from the city’s top records official saying she was checking with the police department and did not know when the records would be available.
Dec. 12, 2023: Arkansas AG Rejects Proposed Ballot Measure Protecting Access to Government Records
Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin on Monday rejected the language for a proposed ballot measure that would make access to government records and meetings a right protected in the state’s constitution.
Griffin rejected the language for the proposed Arkansas Government Transparency Amendment, which would also make it more difficult for lawmakers to narrow access to public meetings and records.
Griffin’s approval is needed before the group behind the measure can begin collecting the 90,704 signatures from registered voters needed to qualify for the ballot. Griffin cited “lack of clarity on key terms” as a reason for the rejection, saying terms like government transparency and public record are never defined in the proposal.
Sept. 22, 2023: Proposed North Carolina Budget Would Exempt Legislators From Public Records Disclosures
Republican state lawmakers in North Carolina are attempting to exempt themselves from public records laws meant to safeguard transparency with a budget provision allowing them to keep any legislative document private — even after they leave office.
Tucked into the 625-page state budget that legislators have begun voting on fewer than 24 hours after its release is a section that First Amendment experts say would enable the General Assembly to conduct much of the public’s work in secret.
Current and former state legislators would no longer be required to reveal any document, drafting request or information request they make or receive while in office. They would also have broad discretion to determine whether a record should be made public, archived, destroyed or sold.
Feb. 16, 2021: Local Oregon Newspaper Wins Major Public Records Battle
On Feb. 5, a district attorney in Oregon ordered a local government agency to unseal a collection of public records related to an economic development project.
The Malheur Enterprise, a local newspaper, had requested the documents last October as part of its ongoing investigation into a state legislator, Rep. Gregory Smith. In addition to serving as director of the Economic Development Department, Smith also owns a construction company that has done contract work for the government. The newspaper wanted to access a number of government records to see whether he was leveraging his official position to help his private business.
The Malheur County Economic Development Department took 85 days to respond to the newspaper’s request, and eventually produced records that were heavily redacted.
Dec. 3, 2020: Federal Appeals Court Rules that FOIA Requests Requiring a Database Query are Allowed
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a lower court’s ruling that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) didn’t have to release data requested by the Center for Investigative Reporting (CIR).
In July 2018, CIR filed a FOIA request with the ATF seeking aggregate data from its Firearm Tracing System (FTS) about the number of guns owned originally by law enforcement that were later used in crimes. The ATF had never released that data before, and the district court ruled that the AFT didn’t have to comply with the request because the search query was tantamount to creating a new record, which FOIA prohibits.
In March 2019, the Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF) filed an amicus brief to point out how the district court’s ruling could “frustrate access to the vast amounts of government digital data in which the public has a legitimate interest.” Further noting that the courts “have consistently held that FOIA requires the extraction and reformatting of components of records in response to FOIA requests, and that such responses do not amount to the creation of new record sor impose undue burden on the agency.”
The Ninth Circuit agreed with EFF’s reasoning, writing, “if running a search across these databases necessarily amounts to the creation of a new record, much government information will become forever inaccessible under FOIA, a result plainly contrary to Congress’s purpose in enacting FOIA.”
EFF Ruling
April 3, 2020: Knight First Amendment Institute Sues CDC for Coronavirus Communication Records
Knight First Amendment Institute, a leading press advocacy group, filed a lawsuit on April 2nd against the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) seeking the immediate release of documents related to policies governing CDC employees’ ability to speak to the press and the public about matters relating to the novel coronavirus.
See also: White House Orders Federal Health Agency To Put Lid on High-Level Coronavirus Discussions
According to the complaint, Knight filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on March 19th for all records “relating to policies or procedures governing public communications by CDC employees or contractors about the coronavirus.” The request also sought specific emails sent by the agency’s public affairs officer, as well as records relating to policies governing communication between CDC employees and the Office of Vice President Mike Pence.
In a press statement about the lawsuit, the Knight Institute said it filed the FOIA request after a number of news stories suggested that the CDC employees had been ordered to consult with the Office of the Vice President before talking to members of the press or public about the pandemic.
“The White House is promoting inaccurate and misleading claims about the pandemic even as it is restricting CDC employees from speaking to the press and the public,” said Anna Diakun, staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute. “We’re concerned about the reliability of the information the public is now getting from the government, and from a First Amendment standpoint, we’re concerned that public employees are not being permitted to speak candidly, even as private citizens,” she said.
According to the lawsuit, the CDC did respond to the Knight Institute’s FOIA request, although only to inform them that their application for “expediting processing” had been denied because it “failed to show that there is an imminent threat to the life or physical safety of an individual.”
On March 26th, the CDC sent a second letter informing Knight that their request was too broad. According to the complaint, the advocacy organization has not yet heard back from the CDC despite having sent a follow-up request on March 27th narrowing the scope of their request.
Complaint FOIA Request
March 16, 2020: BuzzFeed Sues CDA and FEMA for Failing to Comply to FOIA Request for Coronavirus-Related Materials
On March 13, BuzzFeed reporter Jason Leopold filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and three other federal agencies over COVID-19 related records.
On February 12, BuzzFeed submitted a FOIA request to the CDC and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), asking the agencies to produce all emails from their respective directors that mentioned or referred to the Coronavirus, all policy and legal guidance, any and all internal letters and memos, and any and all drafts and final talking points that referred to the virus.
According to the complaint, on February 18 the CDC acknowledged that it had received the request, but that it was “overly broad.” After a bit of back-and-forth, BuzzFeed and the CDC ultimately agreed to limit the timeframe of the request from February 1, 2020 to the present, and to limit the request to the centers’ directors and their immediate aides or deputies.
By the date the lawsuit was filed, however, the CDC hadn’t issued a determination and had yet to produce any records.
FEMA, on the other hand, acknowledged that it received BuzzFeed’s request on February 27, and granted expedited processing that same day. However, on March 5, FEMA narrowed the request for records related to the Coronavirus from Jan. 7, 2020 to Feb. 14, 2020, and for only 13 specific FEMA executives.
As of the filing date of the lawsuit, FEMA hadn’t issued a determination nor has it released any records.
The suit requests that the court declare that the agencies have violated FOIA, and order them to supply the requested records.
April 24, 2019: FOIA Suit Filed Over Secret Government Database
An NBC affiliate in San Diego and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press filed a suit under the Freedom of Information Act in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against four federal agencies.
The complaint filed against the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Citizenship and Immigration Services seeks to obtain records requested in a March, 2019 FOIA concerning an alleged secret database the federal government had created on journalists covering immigration issues at the US and Mexico border.
On March 6, 2019 NBC 7 reported that the government had identified and tracked journalist covering the “migrant caravan,”—people who were fleeing Central America and were traveling through Mexico to get to the US border.
“Specifically, NBC 7’s reporting brought to light the existence of a United States government-created ‘secret database of activists, journalists, and social media influencers tied to the migrant caravan’ . . . According to NBC 7’s reporting, the United States government created dossiers on each individual included in the Database. And, in some instances, the government had placed alerts on the passports of individuals included in the Database,” the complaint states.
According to the TV station’s reporting, at least 10 journalists, seven of whom are US citizens, are included in the database. A spokesperson for Customs and Border Protection told NBC 7 that the agency doesn’t “target” journalists, and has “specific provisions regarding encounters with journalists.”
The ACLU earlier weighed in on the reported existence of the database, calling it “unconstitutional.”
“The First Amendment bars interference with freedom of the press and doesn’t permit the government to retaliate against people based on their viewpoints. That means the government can’t single people out for punishment or harsher treatment simply because it disagrees with the messages they are conveying,” wrote staff attorneys Esha Bhandari and Hugh Handeyside.
CJR ACLU Complaint
Nov. 21, 2018: Knight Sues Intelligence Agencies Over Release of Records on Khashoggi Killing
The Knight First Amendment Institute is suing U.S. intelligence agencies to learn if they complied with a “duty to warn” journalist Jamal Khashoggi about threats to his life.
When an intelligence agency becomes aware of a threat of kidnapping or murder, it is obligated to inform the intended victim, and document and maintain records of its actions. The Knight Institute filed a FOIA request last month seeking records related to the murder, but none of the intelligence agencies have provided it with those documents.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, says that before Khashoggi’s murder on Oct. 2, 2018, U.S. intelligence agencies had apparently intercepted communications in which Saudi officials discussed a plan to kidnap Khashoggi. It is not clear, however, what the agencies learned from these conversations, or what steps they took to warn Khashoggi of the threats.
The Committee to Protect Journalists joined Knight in calling for the release of the records.
“The government must explain what it knew of the threat to Khashoggi before his killing, and what, if anything, it did to warn him of that threat,” said Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University in a statement.
Complaint FOIA Request Just Security
Sept. 20, 2018: First Amendment Coalition Sues DOJ Over Seizure of Reporter’s Records
The First Amendment Coalition filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice in federal court in San Francisco alleging that the DOJ violated the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by failing to provide the documents related to the secret collection of a journalist’s phone and email records. FAC submitted two FOIA requests in June to ascertain if the DOJ provided notice to The New York Times or its reporter Ali Watkins in the course of obtaining Watkins’ phone and email records.
The department’s own internal guidelines would compel them to give notice to the journalists if it were to secure his or her records in all but extraordinary circumstances.
“Based on what we know now, it appears the DOJ ignored or somehow bypassed its important procedures for collecting journalists’ records—we want to know if that’s the case and, if so, why,” said FAC Executive Director David Snyder in a press release released by the organization.
The Hill San Francisco Chronicle Press Release
March 14, 2018: Associated Press Finds Records Withheld, Lost More Than Any Other Time In Past Decade
In reviewing how President Trump’s administration complies to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the Associated Press reports roughly one of every five FOIA requests was completed fully; other requests were partially completed or denied, “78 percent of 823,222 requests, a record over the past decade.”
Associated Press
March 7, 2018: Detailing FOIA Successes Despite Efforts From Obama til Today To Weaken Its Effectiveness
FOIA may be under assault, but it is still proving to be a most useful weapon to uncover the truth.
Unredacted: The National Security Archive Blog
February 26, 2018: EPA Sees Surge in FOIA Lawsuits
A review by Politico of FOIA cases brought against the EPA has found 55 public records lawsuits since Trump’s inauguration. The rise in FOIA requests from the EPA spans the spectrum from “the EPA’s reversals of the Obama administration’s landmark climate change and water rules to pesticide approvals and plans for dealing with the nation’s most polluted toxic waste sites.”
Politico
June 12, 2017: The Wall Street Journal’s FOIA for Trump’s Recorded Conversations Comes Up Empty
The U.S. Secret Service says it has no tapes from the Trump White House in the face of WSJ FOIA.
Wall Street Journal
May 31, 2017: 250 FOIA Requests and Counting Against the Trump administration So Far
Activists are using the power of the Freedom of Information Act to push the Trump administration to release documents – “a 27 percent increase from last year and a 61 percent increase compared to the same timeframe following former President Barack Obama’s 2013 inauguration, TheDCNF analysis found.”
Daily Caller
May 4, 2017: Republican Chairman Instructs Gov’t Agencies to Withhold Info From FOIA Requests
First reported by Buzzfeed, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Rep Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) told the Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin to exclude certain committee communications from FOIA requests. The AP later confirmed that Hensarling had issued the directive to a dozen government agencies, claiming the committee’s material was sensitive and confidential, and should not be made public. Congress exempted itself from FOIA when it passed the legislation in 1966.
Buzzfeed
April 14, 2017: White House Won’t Voluntarily Publish Visitor Logs
Despite criticism from transparency advocates and recently FOIA requests to compel disclosure, the White House has announced it will not voluntarily make White House visitor logs public, breaking with precedent established under President Obama. The decision means that visitor logs will not be made public until five years after Trump leaves office.
CNN
April 10, 2017: Watchdog Groups Sue for Trump’s Visitor Logs
As reported by Reuters, several watchdog groups filed a FOIA request to compel the Department of Homeland Security to release visitor logs at President Trump’s homes, including the White House, Trump Tower in Manhattan, and Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida. The lawsuit followed repeated Democratic calls for disclosure of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago visitor logs.
Reuters
Nov. 17, 2016: Trump versus Obama on FOIA
What is the value of FOIA and transparency? According to a piece in Vice, “Reporters and open government advocates have been so frustrated with the Obama administration’s record on FOIA that many of them believe a Trump administration won’t change their lives much.”
Vice
