FOIA News: ASAP's Sunshine Week Webinar on "FOIA Court Cases"

The American Society of Access Professionals has published a video recording of its recent Sunshine Week webinar on developments in FOIA caselaw. The presenters were FOIA Advisor’s own Ryan Mulvey (who also serves as ASAP President), and Michael Heise of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. A complete list of the cases covered in the webinar, with summaries and citations, can be found here.

FOIA News: Recent trends with FOIA requests

News Media and Non-Profits Probe New Trump Initiatives

FOIAengine: Leading Topics Include DOGE, Executive Orders and Confidential Data

By Randy Miller, Law St. Media, Mar. 26, 2025

As President Donald Trump moves quickly to implement his ambitious agenda, media organizations and non-profits are accelerating and sharpening their use of Freedom of Information Act requests in an attempt to find out more.  FOIA requests from both groups have become increasingly specific and more expansive in terms of the records sought, according to a new PoliScio Analytics analysis of newly released February requests.

The groups’ most recent FOIA requests to federal agencies seek such things as various agencies’ plans for implementing Trump’s executive orders; the extent to which the Department of Government Efficiency has access to (and use of) confidential data; agencies’ interactions and contractual agreements with DOGE; and internal communications about the firing and hiring of government employees.

Read more here.

FOIA News: Another DOGE FOIA lawsuit enters the mix

DOGE Keeps Trying to Dodge the Freedom of Information Act. So We’re Suing.

Shawn Musgrave, The Intercept, Mar. 24, 2025

The Intercept filed a lawsuit on Monday to force the Trump administration to comply with federal transparency law when it comes to the so-called Department of Government Efficiency.

The lawsuit, filed in Manhattan federal court under the Freedom of Information Act, concerns multiple FOIA requests for DOGE records. At first, DOGE simply ignored these requests while Elon Musk’s crew ransacked federal agencies and accessed sensitive data systems.

Then last Tuesday, DOGE sent a brief email to The Intercept claiming it was not subject to FOIA at all because of the way President Donald Trump established DOGE by executive order in January. “We therefore decline your request,” reads the unsigned email.

So we’re suing.

The Intercept’s lawsuit covers five different FOIA requests sent to DOGE since early March.

Read the rest here.

[RPM Comment: The Intercept’s complaint can be found here. Notably, while all the prominent litigation related to DOGE and FOIA to date has been brought in the District of the District of Columbia, this new lawsuit has been filed in the Southern District of New York. Keep an eye out for possible divergent rulings when these cases make their way up to the D.C. and Second Circuits!]

FOIA News: House Dems update FOIA guide (link updated)

Last week, the Democratic members of the U.S. House ‘s Committee on Oversight and Government Reform issued a partially updated edition of A Citizen’s Guide to Using the Freedom of Information Act to Request Government Records.

FOIA News: OIP announces more training for FY 2025

OIP Announces Additional FOIA Training Dates for Fiscal Year 2025

DOJ/OIP, FOIA Post, Mar. 20, 2025

Today, the Office of Information Policy (OIP) announces new dates for Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) training for April through July.  As part of its responsibility to encourage agency compliance with the FOIA, OIP offers numerous training opportunities throughout the year for agency FOIA professionals and individuals with FOIA responsibilities. 

These courses are 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.  OIP will continue to offer virtual training sessions that will be taught in real-time by OIP instructors.  As we move into the Spring of Fiscal Year 2025, we are pleased to announce these virtual training courses, which are also listed on OIP’s Training page.

Read more here.

FOIA News: Top House Dem seeks details on FOIA staffing amid agency firings

Top House Dem seeks details on FOIA staffing amid agency firings

By Justin Doubleday, Federal News Network, Mar. 20, 2025

A top House Democrat is pressing agencies for details on their Freedom of Information Act operations, citing FOIA staff firings impacting at least one agency under the Trump administration.  

In letters to 24 agencies today, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) requests their plans for complying with FOIA. “Preserving your agency’s ability to respond to FOIA requests is a critical tool to provide the American people the transparency to which they are entitled,” Connolly wrote.

Read more.

FOIA News: The CREW-DOGE FOIA saga continues with the opening of summary judgment proceedings

The U.S. DOGE Service has filed its motion for summary judgment in CREW v. DOGE, arguing that it is not an “agency” as defined by the Freedom of Information Act. The government’s brief can be found here.

FOIA News: Judge Cooper rejects DOGE's motion for reconsideration in FOIA case

Following what can only be described as an extraordinarily speedy round of briefing, Judge Christopher Cooper has denied DOGE’s motion for reconsideration in CREW v. DOGE, No. 25-0511 (D.D.C.):

“Because the government’s arguments could all have been raised during the last round of briefing”—that is, during the court’s consideration of CREW’s request for preliminary injunctive relief to compel expedited processing—“none of them provides a basis for reconsideration.”

Although Judge Cooper denied the government’s motion for reconsideration, he nonetheless decided to extend the “deadlines set forth in its prior order”—specifically, to March 27th to provide an estimate of the number of responsive records at issue, and to April 3rd to propose a production schedule—”to ensure that USDS can provide meaningful responses to CREW’s inquiries.” This appears to have been done to facilitate DOGE’s imminently expected motion for summary judgment (or an appeal to the D.C. Circuit of the preliminary injunction, which so far has gone unnoticed). As the court explained, “it would be preferable . . . to review the question of whether USDS is subject to the FOIA on the merits based on a more complete record.” For this reason, the court has seemingly invited CREW to filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) to conduct limited discovery.

Notably, the court appeared unimpressed by the government’s creative arguments about the supposedly erroneous irreparable harm analysis underlying its preliminary injunction, and continued to insist on the necessity of “Congress and the public . . . hav[ing] a hope of receiving the requested information while it remains timely.” The court was moreover incredulous that DOGE Administrator Gleason’s declaration could not have previously been offered into evidence, thus rendering it an inapt basis for reconsideration of last week’s PI order. “[T]he declaration appears to be subject to factual disputes that may provide a basis for CREW to seek discovery,” surmised Judge Cooper. For example, the court doubted Ms. Gleason’s averment that “Elon Must does not work at USDS,” given public representations by President Trump and Musk himself to the contrary. Judge Cooper did not address two other—perhaps, central—arguments advanced by the government, namely, his alleged misapprehension of the structure of DOGE—and the distinction between USDS within the White House, on the one hand, and agency “DOGE Teams,” on the other—and his heavy (and now, continued) reliance on press reports rather than sworn evidence.

The full opinion, which also addresses other arguments advanced by DOGE, can be found here.

FOIA Advisor’s previous reports on this case are here, here, and here.

FOIA News: A quick retort . . . DOGE's reply to CREW filed

The government filed its reply in support of its motion for reconsideration in CREW v. DOGE shortly after the requester lodged its opposition earlier today. The court has not announced whether there will be a hearing, or if it will rule on the papers alone.

The DOGE reply is short, totaling only four pages. The government rejects CREW’s characterization of DOGE’s supposed “litigation strategy,” namely, as an effort to avoid the “agency” merits question because it expected CREW to lose on its irreparable harm theory. In so doing, the government tries to distinguish two types of requested relief: (1) expedited processing by a date certain, which it maintains was what CREW sought in its preliminary injunction motion, and (2) expedited processing in the abstract. “If there was no irreparable harm justifying a preliminary injunction by March 10 (which this Court correct found there was not), there was no basis for CREW’s motion. No plausible theory of party presentation or fair notice required USDS to address whether it is an agency[.]”

The government reiterates, too, that the district court improperly relied “significantly” on “media reports” and failed to “meaningfully address the multiple Executive Orders and presidential memorandum [sic] that delineate USDS’s limited and purely advisory responsibilities as a non-statutory entity[.]” One such example, DOGE maintains, was the court’s focus on the word “implement,” which it considers a “thin reed” to support Judge Cooper’s decision.

In closing, DOGE advised it will file a motion for summary judgment today, March 19th. Although there is, again, no timeline for the court to rule on reconsideration, the government will undoubtedly expect that request to be considered effectively on an emergency basis. DOGE’s proposed summary briefing schedule would end the day before Judge Cooper’s deadline for a production schedule proposal. If action isn’t taken in the government’s favor before that deadline, an appeal to the D.C. Circuit seems quite likely.

FOIA News: Wired dropping paywall for FOIA stories

Wired is dropping paywalls for FOIA-based reporting. Others should follow.

Katie Drummond, Freedom of the Press Found., Mar. 18, 2025

The news business isn’t just any business — it serves a vital role in our democracy, recognized by the First Amendment. But media outlets can’t serve that role if they’re bankrupt. And as a result, news readers often find themselves blocked by paywalls from reading important stories about government business.

That experience is particularly frustrating for readers who are unable to access the groundbreaking investigative reports outlets like Wired magazine have been publishing, particularly over the first couple months of the Trump administration. Fortunately, Wired has a solution — it’s going to stop paywalling articles that are primarily based on public records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

This approach makes a lot of sense from the standpoint of civil duty. They’re called public records for a reason, after all. And access to public documents is more important than ever at this moment, with government websites and records disappearing, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency doing its best to operate outside the public’s view, and the National Archives in disarray.

But some may argue that, from a business standpoint, not charging for stories primarily relying on public records automatically means fewer subscriptions and therefore less revenue. We disagree. Sure, the FOIA process is time- and labor-intensive. Reporters face stonewalling, baseless denials, lengthy appeals processes, and countless other obstacles and delays. Investigative reports based on public records are among the most expensive stories to produce and share with the public.

Read more here.