Court opinions issued Sept. 27, 2019

NY Times v. DOJ (2nd Cir.) -- concluding that Attorney General Holder’s public statements waived attorney work- product privilege with respect to portion of only one of five memoranda regarding CIA treatment of detainees overseas, reversing in part and affirming in part district court’s decision that Holder had “expressly adopted” reasoning of all memoranda.

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs. (D.D.C.) -- determining that: (1) Army Corp of Engineers and U.S. Customs & Border Protection performed adequate search for records provided to President-elect Trump’s Transition Team about construction of wall on southern border, and (2) all disputed withholdings were justified under Exemptions 5, 6, and 7(E).

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

FOIA News: DOJ/OIP announces training dates for FY2020

NEW FOIA TRAINING DATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020

FOIA Post, Sept. 26, 2019

Today, the Office of Information Policy (OIP) announced new dates for FOIA training during Fiscal Year 2020. As part of its responsibility to encourage agency compliance with the FOIA, OIP offers a number of training opportunities throughout the year for agency FOIA professionals and individuals with FOIA responsibilities.  These courses have been designed to offer training opportunities for personnel from all stages of the FOIA workforce, from new hires to the experienced FOIA professionals or FOIA managers. As Fiscal Year 2020 quickly approaches, we are pleased to announce the new training courses and dates for this upcoming fiscal year, which are also available on OIP’s Eventbrite page.

Read more here.

Court opinion issued Sept. 25, 2019

S. Entl. Law Ctr. v. Mulvaney (W.D. Va.) -- determining that Office of Management and Budget failed to perform adequate search for agency reform plans and did not provide court with sufficient information to determine whether OMB properly withheld records pursuant to deliberative process privilege.

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

Court opinions issued Sept. 24, 2019

Judicial Watch, Inc. v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- concluding that DOJ failed to meet its burden to detail the reasonably foreseeable harms that would occur if agency disclosed emails of Sally Yates, which DOJ withheld under Exemption 5 (deliberative process privilege).

Prop. of People, Inc. v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- finding that: (1) FBI needed to submit Vaughn Index in order for court determine whether FBI properly issued partial Glomar response under Exemptions 6 & 7(C) to protect certain records about Congressman Dana Roherbacher; and (2) FBI did not perform adequate search for other records pertaining to Congressman Rohrabacher.

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

Court opinions issued Sept. 23, 2019

Knight First Amendment Inst. at Columbia Univ. v. DHS (S.D.N.Y.) -- granting in part and denying in part government’s use of Exemptions 5 and 7(E) to withhold records concerning the government’s authority to deport individuals from the United States based on their speech, beliefs, or associations.

Broward Bulldog, Inc. v. DOJ (11th Cir.) -- (1) affirming district court’s decision that FBI performed adequate search for records concerning 9/11 Review Commission and that agency properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 1, 3, 5, and 7(E); and (2) reversing district court’s decision that FBI improperly withheld records pursuant to Exemption 7(C) and that FBI properly withheld records pursuant to Exemption 7(D).

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

Court opinion issued Sept. 20, 2019

Morris v. SEC (D.D.C) -- ruling that agency was not required to perform search for requested records concerning child custody proceedings in Texas state courts, because agency sufficiently explained why it would not possess such records and plaintiff offered no contrary evidence.

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

Q&A: Get off my lawn!

Q. I requested records from my file at the Prince William County Building Division in order to find out whether an inspector had entered my garage and shed to take photographs while I was not home. I received a voice message from a FOIA employee who stated that she could not release any records to me because I was still under investigation.

A. If you have not received a written response from the agency yet, you might consider asking the agency for a written response that identifies the specific section of the Code of Virginia upon which the agency is relying to withhold the records you requested. Assuming this matter concerns permitting and is not criminal in nature, it is unclear to me which FOIA exemption would apply. In addition to contacting the agency, you might also consider contacting the Virginia FOIA Council for free advice or dispute resolution.

FOIA News: Six business days to end of federal fiscal year

As transparency advocate Russ Kick noted on Twitter today, fiscal year 2019 will be closing soon and federal FOIA offices are likely to be busy clearing out backlogged requests. Best wishes to all FOIA professionals for a productive week!

FOIA News: Interior watchdog investigating political appointees' review of FOIA requests

Interior watchdog investigating political appointees' review of FOIA requests

By Rebecca Beitsch, The Hill, Sep. 20, 2019

The Department of Interior’s internal watchdog confirmed in letters to two lawmakers that they will review the involvement of the agency’s top officials in crafting agency’s public records process which allows political appointees to review and potentially withhold documents from release.

“Our ongoing review will holistically examine the expanded [Freedom of Information Act] FOIA process, including the involvement of senior officials,” Interior’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) wrote in a letters reviewed by The Hill sent to House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

Grijalva requested an investigation earlier this month of Interior’s Supplemental Awareness Review process, citing evidence that it resulted in inappropriate delays and the removal of entire documents from being released, while Wyden had asked for an investigation into Daniel Jorjani, one of the architects behind the policy, who Wyden says may have lied to Congress about it.

Read more here.

Court opinion issued Sept. 19, 2019

Judicial Watch v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- holding that plaintiff failed to file administrative appeal with respect to request for FBI’s investigatory records concerning former Secretary Hillary Clinton’s use of personal email account, noting that FBI’s letter and two dozen interim productions and representations from two virtually identical lawsuits with same counsel constituted final determination to comply with plaintiff’s FOIA request.

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