Homeland Security Giving Extra Political Scrutiny To 'Activist' Groups FOIA Requests, Singles Out EFF

from the freedom-deserves-extra-scrutiny dept

Mon, Nov 1st 2010 2:45pm — Mike Masnick

When President Obama first came into office, one of the things he pledged was greater transparency, including in responding to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. As we've seen with things like ACTA, where the USTR refused FOIA requests with a totally bogus claim of "national security," the administration has regularly failed to live up to that promise and at times appears to be even worse than previous administrations. Over the last year, reports have come out that FOIA requests from certain groups and reporters are being singled out for political review. That's not the way the FOIA process is supposed to work, but apparently Homeland Security has alerted various FOIA officials that requests from certain groups need to first be sent up the chain for political review, both potentially delaying the release of the information, and subjecting it to reviews and possible redactions that go beyond what the law establishes. As the EFF notes, it seems to be among the groups singled out for special scrutiny, and the letter outlining this policy highlights three specific EFF FOIA requests. So, apparently the plan is "transparency, except when it might hurt us politically."

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: freedom of information, homeland security, politics

24 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Chris Rhodes (profile), 1 Nov 2010 @ 2:57pm

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss (but more expensive!)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- mikej, 1 Nov 2010 @ 3:07pm
  
  Re:
  Yep. Some things never change. I now miss the old eastern bloc. At least you knew exactly what to expect from them. oh wait, we do know what to expect here now. smh.....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2010 @ 3:05pm

I really feel sorry for anyone that believed even a lick of what the democrats promised, they're all the same, same goals but different masters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2010 @ 3:07pm

What is the point of having these procedures (FOIA requests) if they are constantly ignoring them or delaying them for an unreasonable length of time?

Don't they realize that it is better to come clean (even if it hurts them politically), and just release that information before it ends up in Wikileaks or something similar (which it will), and causes a lot more damage (both direct and collateral)?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- westb3 (profile), 1 Nov 2010 @ 3:32pm
  
  Re:
  This would require them to give up control (or perceived control at least from their POV) which is something almost anyone in that or other arenas is just unable to do. The entire basis of getting into a position of power is to be powerful, hoping that they will give away that power is fruitless.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2010 @ 3:40pm

The US government is so concerned with national security except when it comes to an armed invasion by Mexico like we have in the Southwest. Then they sue instead of protecting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MikeC (profile), 1 Nov 2010 @ 3:57pm

Change!!
The only change the democrats were interested in was the name on the parking spots...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
jfgilbert (profile), 1 Nov 2010 @ 3:59pm

Amazing
And the democrats are wondering why the enthusiasm that carried the presidential election is no longer there.
On the other hand, the electorate looks like Charlie Brown, who believes that, this time, Lucy will not take away the football.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No One in Particular, 1 Nov 2010 @ 4:22pm

Possible solution
In following many of Mike's posts, a possible remedy to capricious bureaucrat injustices is available. It's called "Color-of-Law" http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/color-of-law/

The premise is anyone depriving you of your rights under the U.S. Constitution is breaking the law (the constitution supersedes copyright, bogus national security, etc., etc.). Thus, officials/bureaucrats are PERSONALLY liable, along with their company/organization, to lawsuits and/or criminal charges.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hephaestus (profile), 2 Nov 2010 @ 7:04am
  
  Re: Possible solution
  That is rather interesting. It brings to mind Obamacare and the banking bailout ... Are they personally responsible for the costs incured though?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Howard, 1 Nov 2010 @ 4:46pm

EFF are the good guys. What POSSIBLE justification could they have for this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rekrul, 1 Nov 2010 @ 11:07pm
  
  Re:
  EFF are the good guys. What POSSIBLE justification could they have for this?
  
  Any person or group who does anything the government does like, or that inconveniences the government is automatically considered the enemy. I thought everyone knew this...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- RandomGuy (profile), 2 Nov 2010 @ 10:12pm
  
  Re:
  One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.
  
  The NSA has their own ideas as to who the good guys and bad guys are.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2010 @ 4:59pm

Somehow, these politicians have managed to invent opaque transparency. This anomaly is presumably in the process of collapsing reality as we speak. It's been nice knowing you all, however briefly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 1 Nov 2010 @ 5:25pm

I'll contribute to the EFF
Just as soon as they start offering those cool cop-style windbreakers with EFF on the back again...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2010 @ 5:33pm

so why bother voting anymore
i suppose the issue will come to a head when the majority of people dont vote and then can say to those sitting in congress

YOU DO NOT REPRESENT the MAJORITY WILL OF THE PEOPLE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- mattarse (profile), 2 Nov 2010 @ 3:13am
  
  Re: so why bother voting anymore
  According to this we already have that for every mid term election, and have barely make it over 50% for the normal elections -
  
  http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2010 @ 10:03am
  
  Re: so why bother voting anymore
  I don't vote for elected positions, I don't trust or support the candidates and can't vote for them in good conscience, so I don't. What I do is vote on the propositions and so forth. I also think that sends a clearer message, these people pay attention and vote, but not for candidates because they are all crap.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dohn Joe, 1 Nov 2010 @ 10:32pm

What a Joke
The whole FOIA process is a joke. If it was effective then police would be "requesting" criminals for information about their activities, not investigating them!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2010 @ 5:31am

Homeland security is too concerned about the security of copy"right" holders to care about anything else. They need this backdoor so that they can go after more victimless criminals who pirate stuff and claim that they're doing something brave and constructive in order to protect the security of their corporate overlords and their profit margins. What, do you honestly believe that they're brave and competent enough to go after real criminals? ROFLOL.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2010 @ 8:16am

The President has no influence at Homeland Security. All government agencies act independently. The intelligence agencies in particular are beholden to no one. Call it security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mhenriday (profile), 3 Nov 2010 @ 9:58am

FOIA is to a large degree a fraud -
handling of cases is delayed, bogus reasons for refusing access to information are widely employeed by the authorities, and most significant of all, the political backgrounds of those who demand information according to the stipulations of the law are investigated. Is anybody particularly surprised ?... Henri
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jason, 3 Nov 2010 @ 10:19am

Open face chilling sandwich
HOLY SHIT!!! Did you read the memo?

I'm used to Mike making arguments ad absurdum (because it's important to think about the long term potentional for policies), and so I thought that's what this was.

BUT NO, It basically says, "Report anything that we might not like along with all the identifying information on the requester. Thanks, your friendly Gestapo."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 3 Nov 2010 @ 10:20am
  
  Re: Open face chilling sandwich
  http://papersplease.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/foia-blocking-policy.pdf
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]