FOIA Advisor

Court opinion issued Oct. 29, 2025

Court Opinions (2025)Allan BlutsteinComment

Ecological Rights Found. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng'rs (N.D. Cal.) -- on motion for attorney’s fees and costs, ruling that: (1) plaintiff was ineligible for an award against the National Marine Fisheries Service because the agency had issued determinations before the lawsuit was filed; rejecting plaintiff’s argument that NMFS’s referral of certain records negated a final determination, finding instead that the referral constituted a constructive withholding subject to administrative appeal; (2) alternatively, plaintiff was not a prevailing party against NMFS as the lawsuit did not prompt the agency to alter its position or disclose additional responsive records; (3) plaintiff was eligible for an award against USACE because its lawsuit served as a catalyst for the agency’s additional searches, record releases, and agreement to produce documents in native format with metadata; and (4) plaintiff was entitled to an award bases on traditional four-factor test, but reducing requested amount to exclude time spent on unsuccessful claims and excessive or duplicative billing.

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2025 are available here. Earlier opinions are available for 2024 and from 2015 to 2023.

FOIA News: FOIA-shadowing for John Bolton

FOIA News (2015-2025)Allan BlutsteinComment

FOIA Requests Presaged Trouble for Trump Nemesis Bolton

By John A. Jenkins, Law St. Media, Oct. 29, 2025

When the Justice Department unsealed its indictment of John R. Bolton two weeks ago, it wasn’t the first time his name had surfaced in government files.

Long before prosecutors accused the former national security adviser and Donald Trump nemesis of mishandling classified information, Bolton had already become the subject of a flurry of Freedom of Information Act requests — filings that hinted at the controversies still shadowing him years after he left the White House. 

Unnamed requesters as well as the corporate intermediary Cogency Global sought records about Bolton’s behind-the-scenes diplomacy and dealings:  his contacts with Attorney General William Barr, his efforts to block a Chinese takeover of a Ukrainian aerospace firm, even the government’s internal emails about a Justice Department tweet disparaging Bolton in 2020.

Read more here

Court opinion issued Oct. 24, 2025

Court Opinions (2025)Allan BlutsteinComment

New Orleans Navy Housing v. U.S. Dep’t of the Navy (E.D. La.) -- on renewed summary judgment, ruling that the Navy properly relied on Exemption 5’s deliberative process and attorney–client privileges, met the statute’s foreseeable harm requirement, conducted an adequate segregability analysis, and that in camera review was unnecessary given the agency’s supplemental submissions.

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2025 are available here. Earlier opinions are available for 2024 and from 2015 to 2023.

FOIA News: New FOIA Podcast, "Disclosure," to Debut

FOIA News (2015-2025)Ryan MulveyComment

Bloomberg and No Smiling Announce the Launch of New Podcast Series, Disclosure

Bloomberg Media (Oct. 23, 2025)

New York, NY – October 23, 2025 – Bloomberg, in partnership with No Smiling, today announced the launch of Disclosure, a new podcast series exploring the pursuit of government records – and the stories they tell. The show premieres October 28 across all major podcast platforms, with early access to episodes for Bloomberg subscribers. Listen to the trailer here.

Disclosure is hosted by Bloomberg News investigative reporter Jason Leopold and First Amendment attorney Matt Topic, leading experts on using public records laws to uncover government documents. Each week, they give listeners a behind-the-scenes look at how the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and state public records laws can be used to inform the public about what their government is up to and how their taxpayer dollars are being spent.

From Russian pranksters who duped a top government official to reports of documents allegedly flushed down White House toilets and the government’s sale of a coveted Rap album, Disclosure will reveal the obstacles Leopold and Topic face and the unexpected stories that surface once those records are released.

The first episode of Disclosure will debut on all major podcast platforms on October 28, with new episodes released weekly on Tuesdays. Bloomberg subscribers get early access to all subsequent episodes.

Bloomberg produces more than 30 podcasts, delivering smart analysis, timely insights, and compelling storytelling across business, finance, economics, politics, technology, healthcare, sports, and more. Bloomberg podcasts are distributed by iHeartPodcasts and are available on the Bloomberg app, the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, and wherever podcasts are heard.

Leopold also writes the Bloomberg newsletter FOIA Files, where he takes readers behind the scenes of his reporting to share interesting documents never seen before. Subscribe here.

About Bloomberg Media
Bloomberg Media is the world’s leading multi-platform media company for business and finance, which draws on the editorial resources of more than 3,000 journalists and analysts in more than 100 bureaus around the world. Bloomberg Media is the consumer-facing media organization of Bloomberg L.P.

Read the full press release here.

Court opinion issued Oct. 22, 2025

Court Opinions (2025)Allan BlutsteinComment

Malik v. DHS (D.D.C.) -- on renewed summary judgment, concluding that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services properly relied on Exemptions 7(E) and 7(C) to redact a “Memo for the Record” concerning plaintiff’s application for employment with the agency; noting that the agency’s supplemental declaration explained that the memo in question discussed the Office of Personnel Management's background investigation of plaintiff, which qualified as a law enforcement purpose under Exemption 7.

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2025 are available here. Earlier opinions are available for 2024 and from 2015 to 2023.

FOIA News: This and that

FOIA News (2015-2025)Allan BlutsteinComment

Court opinions issued Oct. 17, 2025

Court Opinions (2025)Allan BlutsteinComment

Campaign for Accountability v. DOJ (D.C. Cir.) -- affirming in part and reversing in part the district court’s decision and holding that Office of Legal Counsel’s (OLC) opinions are not subject to FOIA’s “reading-room” disclosure requirements because they are not “final opinions made in the adjudication of cases” nor “statements of policy or interpretations adopted by the agency; vacating the district court’s order requiring disclosure of OLC opinions resolving interagency disputes, reasoning that OLC opinions offer prospective legal advice, not binding orders or adjudications, and therefore do not resolve “cases” or have determinate consequences; noting that although OLC’s opinions are considered authoritative within the Executive Branch, they are not automatically adopted as the “working law” of client agencies unless an agency actually implements them as its own; in a concurring opinion, Judge Rao emphasized that appellant lacked standing because its claims were a generalized grievance without a particularized injury or concrete harm.

Husch Blackwell LLP v. Dep’t of Commerce (D.D.C.) -- in a case concerning records on how and why the Bureau of Industry and Security added certain companies to the “Entity List,” which restricts exports to foreign entities for national security reasons, ruling that: (1) BIS had not justified its withholding under Exemption 1, because its declarations merely repeated classification language without explaining how disclosure would harm national security; and (2) although the Export Control Reform Act qualifies as an Exemption 3 statute, BIS failed to show that withheld memoranda fit within the Ac’s enumerated or closely related categories.

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2025 are available here. Earlier opinions are available for 2024 and from 2015 to 2023.

Court opinion issued Oct. 16, 2025

Court Opinions (2025)Allan BlutsteinComment

Informed Consent Action Network v. FDA (D.D.C.) -- granting 18-month stay after finding that FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) faced exceptional circumstances, specifically “skyrocketing” requests since 2019 and litigation rates that had “exploded” in same time period; noting that agency had demonstrated due diligence through staff reallocation, new hires, and a tiered response system; further noting that plaintiff was a “major contributor to the onslaught,” having submitted more than 350 FOIA requests to CBER and accounting for two-thirds of CBER's open FOIA lawsuits.

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2025 are available here. Earlier opinions are available for 2024 and from 2015 to 2023.

FOIA News: EPA to rescind expedited processing regulation for “environmental justice”

FOIA News (2015-2025)Allan BlutsteinComment

EPA is planning to ax a public records provision that granted expedited processing for marginalized communities.

By Kevin Bogardus, E&E News, Oct. 16, 2025

EPA is preparing to jettison one of its last vestiges of the Biden administration, a rule that sped up Freedom of Information Act requests for marginalized communities burdened with pollution.

As part of President Donald Trump’s sweep of diversity programs across the federal government, the agency is planning to ax a provision added to FOIA regulations during the previous administration. That measure granted expedited processing for requests that showed an “environmental justice-related need” for records pertaining to areas suffering from adverse health and environmental impacts.

The movement to provide relief to polluted places, often occupied by people of color and low income, has become verboten during the Trump administration. The president signed an executive order on his first day back in office to rid agencies of diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programs, including any “environmental justice” offices and services.

Matthew Tejada, former EPA deputy assistant administrator for environmental justice, said ending the FOIA provision would cut off another avenue for ordinary people to access their government.

“Making information requests harder to achieve both further pulls down a veil of secrecy obscuring what this administration is actually up to inside of our nation’s government while simultaneously ensuring that everyone but the most privileged in our country have few to zero means of engaging our government in a meaningful way,” said Tejada, now senior vice president for environmental health at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Rescinding the rule fits in with a larger pattern at EPA during the Trump administration. This year, the agency canceled grants classified as DEI and closed its environmental justice office, where staff received reduction-in-force or layoff notices.

“Since day one, the Trump EPA has been crystal clear that the Biden-Harris administration shouldn’t have forced their radical agenda of wasteful DEI programs and ‘environmental justice’ preferencing on the EPA’s core mission of protecting human health and the environment,” said agency spokesperson Carolyn Holran in a statement.

EPA is already behind some deadlines on the repeal.

The agency was supposed to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking in July and a “Final Action” this month, according to the administration’s latest regulatory agenda. As of Thursday, visitors to EPA’s FOIA public access link can still ask to expedite their requests based on environmental justice.

EPA’s statement didn’t say when the regulation would be finalized and whether it would have a public comment period, as happened with its proposed rule more than two years ago.

“The government-wide Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions represents a snapshot in time, and completions dates are always subject to change,” Holran said.

EPA doesn’t often grant expedited processing under FOIA. In fiscal 2024, the agency sped up 15 requests that sought faster treatment while it denied 293 others, according to its annual report.

Allan Blutstein, a FOIA lawyer for pro-Republican research firms since 2015, opposed the environmental justice provision when it was first issued and now backs its rescission. He urged repeal of the measure in a direct message sent in February to the so-called Department of Government Efficiency team at EPA.

Blutstein said the regulation “effectively tilts the playing field in favor of certain individuals based on demographic factors, creating a form of identity politics within the FOIA process.”

He noted requests could still receive expedited processing in other ways under the public records law.

“Keep in mind that requests about pollution may still qualify for expedition under the ‘compelling need’ standard, and nothing — beyond considerations of fairness — prevents the EPA from interpreting that standard broadly in a different administration,” Blutstein said.

Read more here (with free 7-day trial).