• Skip to main content
  • Home
  • Contact
  • About
  • Search
    • Search US
    • Search Global
  • Global Litigation
  • U.S. Litigation

Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Commerce

Filing Date: 2017
Case Categories:
  • Federal Statutory Claims
    • Freedom of Information Act
      • Lawsuits Brought by Plaintiffs Aligned with Industry Interests
Principal Laws:
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
Description: Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to compel disclosure of communications between a NOAA climate scientist and the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy during the Obama administration.
  • Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Commerce
    Docket number(s): 17-cv-1283
    Court/Admin Entity: D.D.C.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    11/25/2020 Memorandum Opinion Download Department of Commerce's renewed motion for summary judgment granted. Federal Court Said NOAA Justified Redaction of Communications Between Climate Scientist and White House During Obama Administration. The federal district court for the District of Columbia upheld the National Oceanic and
    Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) redaction of certain communications between a NOAA climate scientist and the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) from January 20, 2009, through January 20, 2017. The court concluded that the Freedom of Information Act’s deliberative process privilege shielded the redactions from disclosure. The redacted material fell into four categories: draft analysis of lab work, discussions with OSTP about scientific interpretation and impacts of environmental data sets, discussions with OSTP about a draft memorandum analyzing a Cato Institute memorandum or a Wall Street Journal article, and communications about the content and presentation of press releases and talking points. The court found that a Vaughn index and declaration were sufficient to demonstrate that the redacted material was predecisional and deliberative. The court further found that NOAA satisfied the “foreseeable harm” standard of the FOIA Improvement Act with explanations of why disclosure of the information would endanger “frank discussions between subordinates and superiors” and potentially create “public confusion.” The court was not persuaded by the plaintiff’s argument that NOAA’s real reason for withholding the information was fear of “agency embarrassment” and “painting the agency in a negative light.”

© 2023 · Sabin Center for Climate Change Law · U.S. Litigation Chart made in collaboration with Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP

The materials on this website are intended to provide a general summary of the law and do not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.