Bonner v. FBI (S.D.N.Y.) -- holding that government properly relied on Exemption 3 to redact records prepared by former FBI agents concerning the detention of terrorist Abu Zubaydah; stating that government’s classified declarations “reflect an unusual and commendable degree of care in the Government's approach to classification and redactions. They reflect, as well, that the redactions to the materials in this case were made judiciously, not excessively, and based on a sophisticated and informed understanding of the ongoing national security threats posed by al Qaeda and its affiliates.”
N.Y. Times v, FBI (S.D.N.Y.) -- in case concerning FBI’s report about “Havana Syndrome,” ruling that: (1) agency failed to sufficiently establish the applicability of Exemptions 7(A) and 7(E), thus warranting in camera review of the report; and (2) agency properly relied on Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to withhold the names and phone numbers of Special Agents, locations of victims and their health information, and identifying information of certain witnesses, none of which plaintiff disputes.
Am. Civil Liberties Union of Mass. v. ICE (D. Mass.) -- determining after in camera review that ICE properly used Exemption 5 or Exemption 7(E) to withhold many, but not all, communications from senior attorneys to trial attorneys counting case descriptions, practice pointers, legal strategies, and other guidance.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.