Case Detail
Case Title | DEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
District | District of Columbia | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
City | Washington, DC | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Number | 1:2017cv01877 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Filed | 2017-09-13 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Closed | 2023-02-10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Judge | Judge Emmet G. Sullivan | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plaintiff | DEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Description | The Democracy Forward Foundation submitted a FOIA request to the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys for records concerning contacts between the agency and members of the Trump Transition Team. Democracy Forward also requested a fee waiver. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, Democracy Forward Foundation filed suit. Complaint issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Adequacy - Search, Litigation - Vaughn index, Litigation - Attorney's fees | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Defendant | UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Defendant | U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Documents | Docket Complaint Complaint attachment 1 Complaint attachment 2 Complaint attachment 3 Complaint attachment 4 Opinion/Order [23] FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Emmet Sullivan has affirmed the recommendation of Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey in a case involving a FOIA request from Democracy Forward Foundation to the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys for records concerning the agency's connection with the Trump transition team. On June 2, 2017, DFF submitted a FOIA request to EOUSA for communications sent to or from 67 named members of the Trump Transition Team between November 9, 2016 and January 21, 2017. The agency located a document called the Briefing Book Transition team which it deemed responsive. The agency disclosed 129 pages in full and 20 pages in part to DFF. The agency indicated that a December 2, 2016 meeting was the only time agency staff met with the transition team. The case was referred to Harvey, who recommended that the court deny DOJ's motion for summary judgment. Both parties objected to portions of Harvey's report. DFF challenged the adequacy of the agency's search. EOUSA contended that the agency only met one time with the transition team in December 2016 and that the only responsive document was the briefing book. Sullivan indicated that "the agency considered the scope of Democracy Forward's request â€" all communications between the named Transition Team members and EOUSA â€" and reasonably determined that the only records likely to exist are authorized communications. Indeed, DOJ admits in its briefing that EOUSA understood that is was to search for all communications. The briefing, bolstered by [the agency's] affidavits adequately explains the agency found it likely that only authorized communications exist and confined its search accordingly." Sullivan observed that "here, the affidavits state that only authorized communications and no other communications are likely to exist." DFF insisted non-authorized communications must exist because former President Donald Trump had fired 46 U.S. Attorneys and was trying to block various investigations of him. But Sullivan noted that "whatever evidence there may be of other illegal activity, that evidence does not provide enough support for the charge that EOUSA possesses unauthorized communications â€" particularly in the face of EOUSA's declarations to the contrary." DFF also contended that EOUSA had improperly limited its search to a single records system. Sullivan, however, pointed out that "at base, Democracy Forward speculates â€" based on other actions of the Transition Team and other investigations â€" that there may be unauthorized communications between EOUSA and certain members of the Transition Team. But under FOIA, the Court assesses whether the agency's search 'can be reasonably expected to produce the information requested' and 'will prohibit the agency from limiting its search to only one record system if there are others that are likely to turn up the information requested.' Democracy Forward has not shown that EOUSA's search was unreasonably limited or that other EOUSA employees were likely to have responsive records." However, Harvey found that EOUSA had failed to search the emails of participants in the December 2016 meeting. As part of its search, the attorney responsible for searching the records had only spoken to individuals who participated and was told that they had no further records. Sullivan noted that the responsible attorney "at no point claims that he or any of the other meeting participants performed any search of their own records to support their representations. Although the Court presumes good faith here, FOIA still requires that the agency conduct some search and forbids it from relying on 'professed personal knowledge that no responsive records exist.'" Sullivan ordered EOUSA to supplement the record to better explain the adequacy of its search.
Issues: Adequacy - Search | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
User-contributed Documents | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Docket Events (Hide) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|