When additional statutory procedures are required by Congress:
Hybrid Rulemaking
&
FOIA
3 things to consider when it comes to hybrid rulemaking requirements:
Environmental Law Example: NEPA
Corrosion Proof Fittings v. EPA
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. § 19(c)(1)(B)(ii)
Court says this wasn’t violated
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. § 2605 (c)(1)(C)
But this was violated
“EPA has failed to implement the dictates of TSCA [that requires that] before it impose a ban on a product, it first evaluate and then reject the less burdensome alternatives laid out for it by Congress.”
AND NOW, the
BEST TOPIC:
5 U.S.C. § 552
What Can You Get Through FOIA?
AGENCY . RECORDS .
FOIA Exemptions
(b)(1): National Security Information
(b)(2): Internal Personnel Rules & Practices
(b)(3): Information Exempt Under Other Laws
(b)(4): Confidential Business Information
(b)(5): Privileged Inter/Intra Agency Communication
(b)(6): Personal Privacy Exemption
(b)(7): Law Enforcement Records
(b)(8): Financial Institutions
(b)(9): Geological Information
Dep’t of Justice
v.
Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press
Why de novo review?
(Doesn’t seem very deferential)
Balancing
FOIA’s purpose?
“The basic purpose of the Freedom of Information Act ‘to open agency action to the light of public scrutiny,’ rather than…” to dig up dirt on private citizens (?)
Citizens should be able to find out “what their Government is up to”
But…
What if Medico had improper dealings with a corrupt Congressman? What if he is an officer of a corporation with defense contract?
Medico’s rap sheet wouldn’t illuminate the Congressman’s behavior or the Department of Defense’s conduct.
Holding:
“As a categorical matter… a third party’s request for law enforcement records of information about a private citizen can reasonably expected to invade that citizen’s privacy, and when a request seeks no ‘official information’ about a Government agency, but merely records that the Government happens to be storing, the invasion of privacy is unwarranted.”
FOIA Tips