West River Eagle

FOIA: what it is and why it is important for every citizen



The Freedom of Information Act was passed in 1967 and protects U.S. citizens’ right to know what is going on in their government institutions. Commonly referred to as FOIA, the act requires public agencies to post or provide access to information for the public, especially if it is information that is commonly requested.

When information is not commonly requested, citizens can fill out a FOIA form and submit it to the agency housing the information needed. Unless that information falls under one or more of nine exemptions such as protecting personal privacy, law enforcement investigations or national security.

Sometimes a request for information will be met partially, meaning that while some information is released, other information is redacted. For example, a request for an FBI report could be accepted, but the report may have redacted information, or lines darkened because that information falls under one of the exemptions.

The exemptions can be found on numerous government sites in various formats so that citizens clearly understand what information can be justly withheld from a document.

The United States Department of Justice has a PDF Powerpoint of the exemptions, and the Air Force website has a comprehensive list. The USAF list is presented as follows:

Exemption (b)(1) protects from disclosure national security information concerning the national defense or foreign policy, provided that it has been properly classified in accordance with Executive Order 13526.

Exemption (b)(2) exempts from mandatory disclosure records “related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency.”

Exemption (b)(3) covers information “specifically exempted from disclosure by statute.”

Exemption (b)(4) protects “trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person that is privileged or confidential.”

Exemption (b)(5) protects “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party … in litigation with the agency.”

Exemption (b)(6) permits the government to withhold all information about individuals in “personnel and medical files and similar files” when the disclosure of such information “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

Exemption (b)(7)(A) authorizes the withholding of “records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that production of such law enforcement records or information … could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.”

Exemption (b)(7)(B) protects “records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes (the disclosure of which) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication.

Exemption (b)(7)(C) provides protection for personal information in law enforcement records the disclosure of which “could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

Exemption (b)(7)(D) provides protection for “records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes which could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source and information furnished by a confidential source.”

Exemption (b)(7)(E) provides protection to all law enforcement information which “would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcements investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law.”

Exemption (b)(7)(F) permits the withholding of information necessary to protect the physical safety of “any individual” when disclosure of information about him “could reasonably be expected to endanger his life or physical safety.”

Exemption (b)(8) protects matter that are “contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions.”

Exemption (b)(9) protects “geological and geophysical information an data, including maps, concerning wells.”

The (c)(1) exclusion authorizes federal law enforcement agencies, under specified circumstances, to shield the very existence of records of ongoing investigations or proceedings by excluding them entirely from the FOIA’s reach.

The (c)(2) exclusion provides that “whenever informant records maintained by a criminal law enforcement agency under an informant’s name or personal identifier are requested by a third party, the agency may treat the records as not subject to the requirements of the FOIA unless the informant’s status has been officially confirmed.

The (c)(3) exclusion pertains only to certain law enforcement records that are maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Journalists vigilantly keep an eye on any possible changes to the FOIA act, especially when there seems to be an expansion of the exemptions which would allow more information to be withheld from the public.

In our society, we face a delicate balance between letting people know, and protecting sensitive information.

Let’s say you witness a crime. You report the crime to the police, but you fear that should the criminal and his partners find out that you reported the crime, they will retaliate and your life may be in danger.

While the accused deserves to know who is accusing him or her, the witness has a legitimate concern about his or her own safety. He or she may not want to be named, if named, he or she may have to go into a witness protection program.

A reporter may want the name of the accused and the accuser for a story, but the name of the witness may be protected or the whereabouts of the witness protected under exemption  Exemption (b)(7)(F), “when disclosure of information about him “could reasonably be expected to endanger his life or physical safety.”

While one can certain understand the necessity of the FOIA act in terms of informing the public about a situation that could impact a broader population, one can also understand why some information should not be released to the public.

The issue often comes down to the interpretation of the information. One person could argue that the information — if not released — could cause greater harm than if kept secret, and another could argue that greater harm would come from the release of the information.

In these disputed cases., especially if the person requesting information has the means, the courts decide.

One such case occurred with the Argus Leader Newspaper out of Sioux Falls. Reporter Jonathan Ellis, Feb. 1, 2011, submitted a FOIA request to “the U.S. Department of Agriculture asking for the name, unique identifier, address, store type and the yearly SNAP sales figures for every store in the United States that participates in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps,” reported Ellis in a Jan. 11, 2019 article in the Argus Leader.

The request was denied, save for the release of “the store names, types and addresses, but refused to release yearly sales amounts, arguing the information is prohibited by law from being released and that it constitutes confidential business information” Feb. 17, 2011.

The Argus Leader appealed the request, and in April 2011 submitted a complaint in district federal court. In a volleying from one court hearing to another over an eight-year time span, the case is now in the Supreme Court.

On Jan 11, 2019, Ellis reported that “The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and ultimately decide whether the public has a right to know how much taxpayer money grocers, gas stations, big box retailers and others get by participating in the federal food stamp program.”

While a simplification of the case and its long process, this shows that these debates can go on for years, and the average citizen may not have the means to fight for information he or she deems important for the public to have.

One may question whether or not citizens have an awareness of what they might want to or need to know about our public institutions, where public money goes or how policies are made if we are not aware of how systems operate internally.

On the other hand, some released information could very well cause unnecessary damage to individuals, organizations or systems, but in a democracy, who decides what we need to know or not? Are we all equally equipped to make those decisions?

FOIA is in place to help citizens navigate and challenge each other on these very basic and important questions about the tug-of-war between confidentiality and privacy protections in public institutions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *