Case Detail
Case Title | NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO INC. et al v. FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY et al | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
District | District of Columbia | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
City | Washington, DC | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Number | 1:2017cv00091 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Filed | 2017-01-13 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Closed | 2017-11-28 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Judge | Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plaintiff | NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO INC. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plaintiff | ROBERT BENINCASA | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Description | Robert Benincasa, a producer for the investigations unit of National Public Radio, submitted a FOIA request to the Federal Emergency Management Agency for database information concerning property acquisitions resulting from a natural disaster. The agency told Benincasa that identifying information such as names and addresses would be redacted under Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy). Benincasa filed an administrative appeal, which was denied on the basis of Exemption 6. Benincasa and NPR then filed suit. Complaint issues: Litigation - Attorney's fees, Exemption 6 - Invasion of privacy | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Defendant | FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Defendant | UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Defendant | DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Documents | Docket Complaint Complaint attachment 1 Complaint attachment 2 Complaint attachment 3 Complaint attachment 4 Complaint attachment 5 Complaint attachment 6 Complaint attachment 7 Complaint attachment 8 Complaint attachment 9 Opinion/Order [15] Opinion/Order [16] FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Beryl Howell has ruled that the public interest in knowing more details about FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, which provides funding for the purchase of flood-prone properties, outweighs the privacy interest of individuals whose property was purchased by the program. Robert Benincasa, a producer with NPR's computer-assisted reporting investigations unit, requested records about the program after finding reports by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of the Inspector General had accused the program of mismanagement. FEMA disclosed 66 documents, but withheld names, addresses and GIS coordinates for the properties under Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy). Benincasa appealed that decision, but the agency upheld the redactions on appeal. Howell, however, had little trouble concluding that the public interest in disclosure clearly outweighed the limited privacy interests. The agency attempted to show that disclosure would constitute an invasion of privacy because it would connect the individuals who a particular program, particularly by suggesting they had received a unique government benefit. Howell pointed out that "because production would reveal only a one-time receipt of payment for a single past sale of real property rather than a recurring receipt of benefits, a person could not infer whether the seller has the sale money or is due to receive additional money." The agency argued disclosure could bring participants unwanted media attention. Howell indicated that "because FOIA requests almost always seek previously-unavailable information that sheds light on government activities, the government's disclosure in every case may attract media attention. To allow an agency to invoke Exemption 6 merely because the media might contact an individual in connection with a produced record would bring a vast number of FOIA requests within Exemption 6's auspices, undermining FOIA's purpose of allowing 'citizens to know what their Government is up to.'" Benincasa argued that the information was contained in public property records, but Howell noted that hardly meant that it was readily available. She observed that "the information at issue, though public in a literal sense, is not in any meaningful way." Having found a minimal privacy interest, Howell turned to the public interest, pointing out that "disclosure of the records at issue would serve the public interest." She added that "production of the records sought would reveal at least three pieces of information regarding the defendants' management of the HMGP currently unknown to the public â€" the specific locations of properties purchased, the properties' individual purchase prices, and the identities of HMGP sellers." FEMA argued that under Dept of State v. Ray, 502 U.S. 164 (1991), the derivative use of government information to contact individuals was not recognized as a public interest. Howell noted that "Ray, however, expressly declined to adopt 'a rigid rule' disregarding public interest in "derivative use" of requested documents,' and the D.C. Circuit 'takes derivative uses into account in evaluating the impact of disclosure on the public interest.'" Finding that the public interest in disclosure outweighed the privacy interests of the property owners, Howell rejected the agency's further claim that at least names should be protected. Instead, she observed that "disclosure of HMGP sellers' names would not only enable identification of fraud against the government â€" itself an important public interest â€" but would also assist the public in determining whether government actors have themselves committed fraud, coerced private citizens into selling their property, or paid sellers the full amounts they were due under the HMGP's terms."
Issues: Exemption 6 - Invasion of privacy | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
User-contributed Documents | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Docket Events (Hide) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|