CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators
14,662
edits
Freedom of Information Act (United States): Difference between revisions
Freedom of Information Act (United States) (view source)
Revision as of 01:18, 11 February 2025
, 11 FebruaryText replacement - "George W. Bush" to "George W. Bush"
m (1 revision imported) |
m (Text replacement - "George W. Bush" to "George W. Bush") |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 128: | Line 128: | ||
=== 2001 Executive Order limiting the FOIA === | === 2001 Executive Order limiting the FOIA === | ||
[[Executive Order 13233]], drafted by [[Alberto R. Gonzales]] and issued by President | [[Executive Order 13233]], drafted by [[Alberto R. Gonzales]] and issued by President George W. Bush on November 1, 2001, restricted access to the records of former presidents. | ||
This order was revoked on January 21, 2009, as part of President [[Barack Obama]]'s {{ExecutiveOrder|13489}}.<ref>''Executive Order no. 13489, Presidential Records'', {{Federal Register|74|4669}} (January 21, 2009)</ref> Public access to presidential records was restored to the original extent of five years (12 for some records) outlined in the [[Presidential Records Act]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://fas.org/sgp/obama/presidential.html|title=Executive Order 13489 on Presidential Records|work=fas.org|access-date=January 1, 2016|archive-date=January 26, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160126201113/http://fas.org/sgp/obama/presidential.html|url-status=live}}</ref> | This order was revoked on January 21, 2009, as part of President [[Barack Obama]]'s {{ExecutiveOrder|13489}}.<ref>''Executive Order no. 13489, Presidential Records'', {{Federal Register|74|4669}} (January 21, 2009)</ref> Public access to presidential records was restored to the original extent of five years (12 for some records) outlined in the [[Presidential Records Act]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://fas.org/sgp/obama/presidential.html|title=Executive Order 13489 on Presidential Records|work=fas.org|access-date=January 1, 2016|archive-date=January 26, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160126201113/http://fas.org/sgp/obama/presidential.html|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
| Line 150: | Line 150: | ||
=== OPEN Government Act of 2007 === | === OPEN Government Act of 2007 === | ||
President | President George W. Bush signed the Openness Promotes Effectiveness in our National Government Act of 2007, {{USPL|110|175}}, on December 31, 2007. This law, also known as the "OPEN Government Act of 2007", amended the federal FOIA statute in several ways.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ175.110 |title=Public Law 110-175 OPENNESS PROMOTES EFFECTIVENESS IN OUR NATIONAL GOVERNMENT ACT OF 2007 |publisher=Government Printing Office |access-date=2010-06-13 |date=2007-12-31 |archive-date=January 11, 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090111204852/http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ175.110 |url-status=live }}</ref> According to a White House press release, it does so by: | ||
#establishing a definition of "a representative of the news media;" | #establishing a definition of "a representative of the news media;" | ||
#directing that required attorney fees be paid from an agency's own appropriation rather than from the Judgment Fund; | #directing that required attorney fees be paid from an agency's own appropriation rather than from the Judgment Fund; | ||
| Line 196: | Line 196: | ||
=== Secret e-mail accounts and abusive fees === | === Secret e-mail accounts and abusive fees === | ||
In 2013, the | In 2013, the Associated Press uncovered several federal agencies where staff regularly used fictitious identities and secret or unlisted email accounts to conduct government business. The use of these email accounts stymied FOIA requests.<ref name="AP20130604">{{cite news|last=Gillum|first=Jack|title=TOP OBAMA APPOINTEES USING SECRET EMAIL ACCOUNTS|url=http://bigstory.ap.org/article/emails-top-obama-appointees-remain-mystery|access-date=24 September 2013|publisher=The Associated Press|date=4 June 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131007164848/http://bigstory.ap.org/article/emails-top-obama-appointees-remain-mystery|archive-date=2013-10-07|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=US officials found to be using secret government email accounts|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/04/us-officials-secret-email-accounts|access-date=24 September 2013|publisher=The Associated Press|work=The Guardian|date=4 June 2013|archive-date=May 15, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160515043314/http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/04/us-officials-secret-email-accounts|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="CEC20130614">{{cite web|last=Woolery|first=Liz|title='Secret' Email Accounts Raise More Questions, Concerns About Government Transparency|url=http://www.chillingeffects.org/uncat/weather.cgi?WeatherID=760|publisher=Chilling Effects Clearinghouse|access-date=24 September 2013|date=14 June 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130720234403/http://www.chillingeffects.org/uncat/weather.cgi?WeatherID=760|archive-date=2013-07-20|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://news.vice.com/article/while-us-attorney-general-eric-holder-used-kareem-abdul-jabbars-birth-name-as-his-official-email-address|title=While US Attorney General, Eric Holder Used Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's Birth Name as His Official Email Address|website=VICE News|date=February 25, 2016 |language=en-US|access-date=2016-02-27|archive-date=February 26, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160226082915/https://news.vice.com/article/while-us-attorney-general-eric-holder-used-kareem-abdul-jabbars-birth-name-as-his-official-email-address|url-status=live}}</ref> In some cases, the government demanded exorbitant (greater than $1 million) fees for records that appeals showed should be available for minimal cost.<ref name="AP20130604" /><ref name="CEC20130614" /><ref>{{cite web|title=DEA wants $1.4 million before it will begin processing request|url=https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2015/feb/05/dea-wants-14-million-it-will-begin-processing-requ/|website=MuckRock|date=February 5, 2015 |access-date=2016-02-13|archive-date=February 17, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160217010516/https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2015/feb/05/dea-wants-14-million-it-will-begin-processing-requ/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2016/feb/26/biggest-foia-fee-all-time/|title=The Pentagon's $660 million FOIA fee|website=MuckRock|date=February 26, 2016 |access-date=2016-02-27|archive-date=March 4, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304131700/https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2016/feb/26/biggest-foia-fee-all-time/|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
==Processing time== | ==Processing time== | ||
| Line 209: | Line 209: | ||
== Abuse of FOIA requests == | == Abuse of FOIA requests == | ||
Since 2020, election officials across the U.S. have reported an overwhelming increase in records requests from apparent [[Election denial movement in the United States|election deniers]] attempting to disrupt the functioning of local and county election offices.<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Gardner |first1=Amy |last2=Marley |first2=Patrick |date=2022-09-13 |title=Trump backers flood election offices with requests as 2022 vote nears |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/09/11/trump-election-deniers-voting/ |access-date=2024-09-09 |newspaper=Washington Post |language=en-US |issn=0190-8286}}</ref> Often unreasonably broad, repetitive, or based on misinformation, the high volume of requests has led to what a Colorado official said amounts to "a [[denial-of-service attack]] on local government." Local election officials in Florida and Michigan have reported spending 25-70% of staff time in recent years on processing public records requests.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Election Officials & the Misuse of Public Records Requests |url=https://electioninnovation.org/research/public-records-requests/ |access-date=2024-09-09 |website=The Center for Election Innovation & Research |language=en-US}}</ref> In 2022, officials in [[Maricopa County, Arizona]] reported one request that required nearly half the election office’s staff to spend four days sorting and scanning 20,000 documents.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Layne |first=Nathan |date=August 3, 2022 |title=Insight: Pro-Trump activists swamp election officials with sprawling records requests |website= | Since 2020, election officials across the U.S. have reported an overwhelming increase in records requests from apparent [[Election denial movement in the United States|election deniers]] attempting to disrupt the functioning of local and county election offices.<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Gardner |first1=Amy |last2=Marley |first2=Patrick |date=2022-09-13 |title=Trump backers flood election offices with requests as 2022 vote nears |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/09/11/trump-election-deniers-voting/ |access-date=2024-09-09 |newspaper=Washington Post |language=en-US |issn=0190-8286}}</ref> Often unreasonably broad, repetitive, or based on misinformation, the high volume of requests has led to what a Colorado official said amounts to "a [[denial-of-service attack]] on local government." Local election officials in Florida and Michigan have reported spending 25-70% of staff time in recent years on processing public records requests.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Election Officials & the Misuse of Public Records Requests |url=https://electioninnovation.org/research/public-records-requests/ |access-date=2024-09-09 |website=The Center for Election Innovation & Research |language=en-US}}</ref> In 2022, officials in [[Maricopa County, Arizona]] reported one request that required nearly half the election office’s staff to spend four days sorting and scanning 20,000 documents.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Layne |first=Nathan |date=August 3, 2022 |title=Insight: Pro-Trump activists swamp election officials with sprawling records requests |website=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pro-trump-activists-swamp-election-officials-with-sprawling-records-requests-2022-08-03/ |access-date=September 9, 2024}}</ref> | ||
A review of recent state laws by the Center for Election Innovation & Research found at least 13 states that have sought to protect election staff from the abuse of FOIA requests in several ways, such as creating publicly accessible databases that do not require staff assistance and giving election staff the authority to deny unreasonable or clearly frivolous requests.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite web |date=2021-06-09 |title=Lawmakers eye more exemptions to target "abuse'" of FOIA |url=https://apnews.com/article/government-and-politics-01308df97ce01632451c8e4aacecda3c |access-date=2024-09-09 |website=AP News |language=en}}</ref> | A review of recent state laws by the Center for Election Innovation & Research found at least 13 states that have sought to protect election staff from the abuse of FOIA requests in several ways, such as creating publicly accessible databases that do not require staff assistance and giving election staff the authority to deny unreasonable or clearly frivolous requests.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite web |date=2021-06-09 |title=Lawmakers eye more exemptions to target "abuse'" of FOIA |url=https://apnews.com/article/government-and-politics-01308df97ce01632451c8e4aacecda3c |access-date=2024-09-09 |website=AP News |language=en}}</ref> | ||