Case Detail
Case Title | INSIDER INC. v. U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
District | District of Columbia | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
City | Washington, DC | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Number | 1:2021cv02653 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Filed | 2021-10-11 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Closed | 2022-10-18 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Judge | Judge Trevor N. McFadden | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plaintiff | INSIDER INC. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Description | Insider, Inc. submitted two FOIA requests to the General Services Administration for records. The first request asked for records concerning expenditures made from outgoing President Donald Trump's Presidential Transition account. The second request asked for emails between GSA and representatives of former President Trump regarding expenditures from the presidential transition account at GSA. The agency acknowledged receipt of the requests. The agency responded to both requests by disclosing four PDF files. The agency withheld the names of five employees of the First Lady, citing exemption 6 (invasion of privacy). Insider, Inc. filed an administrative appeal of the denial. GSA upheld the denial. Insider, Inc. also requested similar records about Vice President Pence's transition expenses. The names of employees were also withheld in response to Pence transition expense requests. Insider, Inc. also filed an administrative appeal which was denied by GSA. Insider, Inc. then filed suit. Complaint issues: Litigation - Attorney's fees | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Defendant | U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Appeal | D.C. Circuit 22-5330 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Documents | Docket Complaint Complaint attachment 1 Complaint attachment 2 Complaint attachment 3 Opinion/Order [18] FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Trevor McFadden has ruled that the General Services Administration properly withheld information about expenditures related to President Trump and Vice President Pence's 2020 transition teams under Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy) in response to FOIA requests from media company Insider, Inc. In response to Insider's FOIA requests, GSA disclosed hundreds of pages of records, including a spreadsheet of each transition team, detailing each team members' salary and estimated benefits. However, GSA redacted the names of some team members to protect their privacy. McFadden explained that to carry its burden of proof on Exemption 6, GSA must show that the files qualified as similar files and that disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. McFadden found GSA had met both standards. He pointed out that "for one thing, other transition staff have been harassed and threatened. Plus, the team members are not public figures." Insider argued that GSA was required to show that the transition members were low-level government employees who had legitimate expectations of privacy. But McFadden indicated that "rather, they are private citizens; GSA merely pays them. And private citizens, like low-level government employees, have a heightened privacy interest." In arguing that disclosure would be in the public interest, Insider claimed that "presidential transitions are important and thus the public has a significant interest in knowing who helps run them." McFadden rejected the claim, noting that "disclosing transition staffs' names, alone, tells the public almost nothing about what GSA is up to. GSA does not hire transition teams. Nor does it decide their pay or job duties. And GSA is not the staffs' employer. It merely supports transition teams by paying their staff and helping with their administrative needs." He added that "GSA has already disclosed practically all responsive information about its involvement with the transition teams. . .Insider got all the information that would help the public know more about GSA's expenditures from presidential transition accounts." McFadden noted that "any public interest here is light. In contrast, the privacy interest weighs heavily. There is a real threat that the team members would be threatened or harassed if their names were disclosed."
Issues: Exemption 6 - Invasion of privacy | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
User-contributed Documents | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Docket Events (Hide) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|