FOIA Advisor

FOIA Focus: Eric Bolinder, Esq., Cause of Action Institute

FOIA Focus (2015-2021)Allan Blutstein1 Comment
Yankees.jpg

When did you join Cause of Action and what are your main areas of practice?

I joined CoA in July of 2014.  My practice focuses on administrative law, including litigation in both federal district and appellate courts.  I also do a lot of transparency work, engaging in strategic oversight of the executive branch through investigations and FOIA litigation.

When did you submit your first FOIA request and what did you ask for?

My first FOIA request came in Fall of 2014.  It was to the Fish & Wildlife Service seeking a combination of records about broad subject areas and emails from specific individuals.  Reading it (I managed to dig it up for this interview!), it’s amazing to see how much I would change given the FOIA experience I’ve gotten in the past 5 years.  Narrower, focused FOIAs with defined search terms are the best way of getting quick FOIA productions

What is the most unusual agency response you have received to a FOIA request?

Oh this is one of my favorite FOIA stories.  One time I FOIA’d a number of agencies for text message records, which should be available under the statute.  However, most agencies simply do not have the technology to process them.  One agency, in an effort I appreciated, didn’t seem to know it could screenshot cell phone screens.  Instead, they took agency Blackberries, pulled up the texts, and then put them face down on a copy machine.  They then scanned those copies in and sent them to me.  I still laugh thinking about that one.  It’s also quite revealing of how far behind some agencies are with basic technology. 

If you could change one thing about the FOIA statute, what would it be and why? 

I think every FOIA litigator’s default response here would be to narrow exemption b(5), which I agree with, but let me try something out of the box.  On administrative appeal determinations for withholdings, agencies should be required to provide a sort of mini-Vaughn index.  Not something that hits the level of what’s required in litigation, but still requires a sworn declaration that the agency acted in good faith accompanied by a short explanation of the redactions.

In a recent ruling, a district court agreed with your argument that the FBI failed to show that exceptional circumstances justified a delay in processing documents.  What is the significance of this decision?  

The FBI has been seeking Open America stays in a number of its cases, asking for years of delays on releasing documents.  For our nation’s premier law enforcement agency, such delays on transparency are not acceptable.  Judge Kollar-Kotelly held that the FBI had not shown any exceptional circumstances, such as a spike in FOIA requests, and should be able to handle requests as quickly as usual.  This is critical because lawyers can take this decision and use it to stop the FBI’s attempts at Open America stays in other cases.  And, beyond that, it further establishes the bar all agencies must meet to get these onerous extensions.  In our case, the FBI had asked for a delay until December 25, 2020!  As much as I’d like to wake up to records under the tree…   

Where were you born/grow up? Where is your favorite hometown place to visit?

I was born in New York and grew up in Lancaster, PA. Favorite place is Lititz Springs Park.

If you could meet any historical icon, of the past or present, who would it be and why?

The Apostle Paul, who wrote nearly half of the New Testament.  Would love to spend time talking to him about his encounter with Christ, ministry, and the Gospel.  Thankfully, he wrote a lot of that stuff down already!

If you could watch only one movie again, which would it be and why?

Return of the Jedi, which I do watch again and again.  It’s not the best Star Wars movie, but it has it all: lightsaber duels, epic space battles, and Ewoks.  (Ok, just kidding on the last one).

It is no secret that the New York Yankees are your favorite baseball team.   Who would make your all-time best lineup?   

1B – Lou Gehrig

2B – Robinson Cano

SS – Derek Jeter

3B – Alex Rodriguez

C – Yogi Berra (Sorry Allan)

OF – Micky Mantle

OF – Babe Ruth

OF – Joe DiMaggio

SP – Roger Clemens

RP – Mariano Rivera

What are you really bad at that you would like to be better at?

Prayer, which has been a lifelong struggle for me.  It is such a privilege to be able to commune daily with God in prayer, and it’s something I’ve been working hard on lately. 

FOIA News: USCIS Expands FIRST: A Fully Digital FOIA System

FOIA News (2015-2024)Kevin SchmidtComment

USCIS Expands FIRST: A Fully Digital FOIA System

Release Date: June 25, 2019

WASHINGTON— USCIS is announcing the expansion of its digital Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Immigration Records System (FIRST). FIRST is the only system in the U.S. government that allows users to submit and track FOIA requests and receive documents digitally. This process will save time, improve efficiency, and reduce potential errors that can occur with manually handling paper.

Starting today, FOIA requestors with a USCIS online account can submit requests online for their own records. Soon, they will be able to submit online requests for non-A-File material (policies, communications, etc.) Later this year, USCIS online account holders can make requests on behalf of another person.

Read more here.

Court opinions issued June 24-25, 2019

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

June 25, 2019

Nikaj v. U.S. Dep't of State (W.D. Wash.) -- concluding that agency properly withheld certain records concerning plaintiff’s unsuccessful visa applications pursuant to Exemptions 3 (Immigration & Nationality Act), 6, and 7(C).

Judicial Watch v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- finding that FBI properly relied on attorney-work product privilege to withhold agent interviews of President Obama and his advisors concerning former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich.

June 24, 2019

Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media (S.Ct.) -- reversing Eighth Circuit’s decision and holding that commercial and financial information is “confidential” under Exemption 4 when it is customarily and actually treated as private by its owner and provided to the government under an assurance of privacy,

Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here

FOIA News: Robert Freeman, renowned public records expert, fired for misconduct

FOIA News (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Advocate Dedicated to Uncovering Government Secrets Is Fired for Sex Harassment

Robert Freeman, a nationally known force for government transparency, engaged in “unwanted physical contact” with a female reporter earlier this year.

By Jesse McKinley, N.Y. Times, June 25, 2019

For more than four decades, Robert J. Freeman was a champion of government transparency in New York.

As the executive director of the Committee on Open Government, he helped offer access to records that the state might have otherwise been happy to shield. But a state investigation revealed he had kept secrets of his own.

On Monday, he was fired after the inquiry showed he had sexually harassed a female reporter and engaged in other inappropriate sexual behavior using his state-owned computer.

Read more here.

[ALB comment: The FOIL godfather foils his career and legacy. Sad.]

FOIA News: New EPA rule could expand Trump officials' powers to reject FOIA requests

FOIA News (2015-2024)Kevin SchmidtComment

New EPA rule could expand number of Trump officials weighing in on FOIA requests

By Miranda Green, The Hill, June 25, 2019

More political appointees at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could soon have the authority to weigh in on public information requests.

The rule is expected to be published in the Federal Register as early as Wednesday and will not allow for a public comment period.

According to the new language in the FOIA rule signed by EPA chief Andrew Wheeler last week, the administrator and other officials would be allowed to review all materials that fit a FOIA request criteria, known as responsive documents, and then decide “whether to release or withhold a record or a portion of a record on the basis of responsiveness or under one or more exemptions under the FOIA, and to issue ‘no records’ responses.”

Read more here.

[Note: An early version of this story mischaracterized the scope of the new rule and misstated some of the authorities that come with it.]

FOIA News: OIP Statement on SCOTUS Decision

FOIA News (2015-2024)Kevin SchmidtComment

SUPREME COURT ISSUES DECISION ON EXEMPTION 4 OF THE FOIA

Today the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Food Mktg. Inst. v. Argus Leader Media, 139 S. Ct. 915 (2019), which examines the definition of the term confidential for applying Exemption 4 of the FOIA.  The Court’s decision overturns the definition of confidential established over forty years ago in Nat’l Parks & Conservation Ass'n v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765 (D.C. Cir. 1974).  The Court’s opinion can be found here.  

As with all significant FOIA developments, OIP will issue guidance and provide training on the impact of this decision.  Please be sure to continue following us on FOIA Post for announcements on when guidance is issued and training opportunities are offered.  In the meantime, agencies are always welcome to seek advice through OIP’s FOIA Counselor Service.

Read more here.

FOIA News: Reaction to SCOTUS Ruling on Exemption 4

FOIA News (2015-2024)Kevin SchmidtComment

FOIA News: SCOTUS strikes down D.C. Circuit's Exemption 4 test

FOIA News (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Supreme Court limits access to government records in loss for Argus Leader, part of the USA TODAY Network

Jonathan Ellis & Richard Wolf, USA TODAY, June 24, 2019

The Supreme Court limited public and media access to government records Monday by expanding a federal law's definition of what can be deemed confidential.

At issue was whether confidentiality, as used in a section of the Freedom of Information Act, means anything intended to be kept secret or only information likely to cause harm if publicized. The high court adopted the broader definition.

Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the 6-3 decision, with Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissenting.

Read more here.

Copy of decision here.

[ALB comment: Bad result, correct decision. Congress should amend the statute]

Court opinions issued June 21, 2019

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Whittaker v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- ruling that FBI failed to explain with reasonable specificity how Exemption 7(E) categorically protects the results of its “National Agency Check.”

Poulsen v. DOD (N.D. Cal.) -- determining that plaintiff was ineligible for attorney’s fees notwithstanding government’s partial withdrawal of Glomar responses following two intervening public acknowledgments relevant to plaintiff’s request.

Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.