I Think There Was Another Very Big Court Decision Handed Down Today

[ThomWV]

I just caught a hint of it on the TV as I came in from the garden but what little I saw and heard gave me the impression that they handed down a ruling that made it impossible for the Bush Administration to continue to ignore Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests. That could prove to be a monster that just got out of the closet.

Someone else will probably know a lot more than I do about this - please chime in.

[ColbertWatcher]

1. k+r n/t

[Tatiana]

2. Supreme Court rejects limits on FOIA lawsuits

Supreme Court rejects limits on FOIA lawsuits

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court has rejected limits on Freedom of Information Act lawsuits that seek the same information as earlier legal actions.

In a unanimous ruling, the justices say a lower court was wrong to conclude that a vintage airplane buff could not sue for the same documents that were sought by a fellow lover of antique aircraft.

Brent Taylor is executive director of the Antique Aircraft Association and a mechanic who restores vintage airplanes. He sued the Federal Aviation Administration for the plans for an antique F-45 plane.

Taylor filed his lawsuit less than a month after an appeals court issued its ruling against another member of the same organization who sought the same plans.

Government watchdogs and press freedom groups backed Taylor.

http://news.findlaw.com/ap/a/w/1154//06-12-2008/20080612082005_15.html

[vharlow]

5. Supreme Court rejects limits on FOIA lawsuits

----that seek the same information as earlier legal
actions.----

I can't figure out why they would be reluctant to release info
they had already released in the first place.  

[Tatiana]

7. What if the information itself has changed?

As a politician, I might have no problems with releasing tax returns showing I made, say, $80,000 in one year.

But let's say last year I made over $1 million.

Same type of information (tax info.), but the facts have now changed.

Someone's going to question how I went from $80,000 to $1 million in one year's time.

[The Backlash Cometh]

8. Maybe because one of the things that settlement agreements strive

for is containment. Even if the government loses once, it tries to contain the information by imposing gag orders. They also try to collect all the information that their opponents used during the court proceedings so that no one else can follow their strategy. Also, if there is a confidentiality clause, there might also be a false trail in the public records. In other words, they might have gotten a judge to sign off that there was no culpability and the trial is dismissed, when in fact, the settlement involved the transference of money for damages. That agreement just will not be posted in a public manner.

Hard to believe that this thing happens, but it does.

[vharlow]

10. gag orders are ordered by judges....

not the government.

[The Backlash Cometh]

12. Well, there is the legal term, and the popular usage.

And I'm sure I'm guilty of taking liberties with this one. What I, ordinary Jane on the street, would call a gag order, a lawyer might think of as a confidentiality clause. Governments do enter into settlements with confidentiality clauses without needing an order from a judge, and though that government body might honor the public record requests for a copy of the settlement agreement, a person has to know where they are located, and what to ask for. Because, what the local government will do, is not record it publicly. I don't think that most common people differentiate between the gag order or the confidentiality clause, and are afraid to challenge either one of them.

[nashville_brook]

9. in our 9/11 madness, there has many instances of info being classified after it was public domain,

i.e. reported on the news.

[vharlow]

11. Cite please?

[The Backlash Cometh]

13. There are so many examples,

and I'm not so sure they're all connected to 9/11. Just do a search for Bush Administration reclassifies information.

http://www.slate.com/id/2136480

[Sydnie]

16. Just google

removed from national archives

you should see plenty of articles about things that WERE public being reclassified ... including many things from so far back, I can't see what reclassification protects at this point.

[lynnertic]

14. Also remember all the info that was retroactively classified in the past 8 yrs

lots of that info was requested before.

Actually I wonder if this ruling would apply.

[ljm2002]

15. It was not released in the first place...

...the first FOIA suit was unsuccessful. This is another attempt by a member of the same group who brought suit the first time.

[shraby]

3. Here it is, a very short article

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court has rejected limits on Freedom of Information Act lawsuits that seek the same information as earlier legal actions.

In a unanimous ruling, the justices said Thursday a lower court was wrong to conclude that a vintage airplane buff could not sue for the same documents that were sought by a fellow lover of antique aircraft.

Brent Taylor is executive director of the Antique Aircraft Association and a mechanic who restores vintage airplanes. He sued the Federal Aviation Administration for the plans for an antique F-45 plane.

(snip)

Government watchdogs and press freedom groups backed Taylor. They worried that government agencies would try to short-circuit efforts by people who request similar records for different reasons.

The case is Taylor v. Sturgell, 07-371.


<http://www.dailymail.com/News/200806120343>

[mulsh]

4. yes there was a unanimous decision re: limiting FOIA

Supreme Court rejects limits on FOIA lawsuits

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court has rejected limits on Freedom of Information Act lawsuits that seek the same information as earlier legal actions.

In a unanimous ruling, the justices say a lower court was wrong to conclude that a vintage airplane buff could not sue for the same documents that were sought by a fellow lover of antique aircraft.

Brent Taylor is executive director of the Antique Aircraft Association and a mechanic who restores vintage airplanes. He sued the Federal Aviation Administration for the plans for an antique F-45 plane.

http://news.findlaw.com/ap/a/w/1154//06-12-2008/20080612082005_15.html



here's the decision: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-371.pdf

[ThomWV]

6. I found the decision and just finished reading it. Here's a link

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-371.pdf

I am not a lawyer but the question was easy enough to understand, as was the decision. I did not notice or read the descending opinions so I don't know what the huns had to say about it.