Document: 410 U.S. 73 93 S.Ct. 827 35 L.Ed.2d 119 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY et al., Petitioners,v.Patsy T. MINK al. No. 71—909. Argued Nov. 9, 1972. Decided Jan. 22, 1973. Syllabus Respondent Members of Congress brought suit under the Freedom Information Act 1966 to compel disclosure nine documents that various officials had prepared for President concerning a scheduled underground nuclear test. All but three were classified as Top Secret or E.O. 10501, and petitioners represented all inter-agency intra-agency used in Executive Branch's decisionmaking processes. The District Court granted petitioners' motion summary judgment on grounds each was exempt from compelled by 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(1) (hereafter Exemption 1), excluding matters 'specifically required order be kept secret interest national defense foreign policy,' 552(b)(5) 5), 'inter-agency memorandums letters which would not available law party . litigation with agency.' Appeals reversed, concluding (a) I permits nondisclosure only portions requires nonsecret components if separable, (b) shields governmental 'decisional processes' factual information unless 'inextricably intertwined policy-making processes.' ordered examine camera determine both aspects separability. Held: 1. 1 does permit six inspection sift out 'non-secret components,' met their burden demonstrating entitled protection exemption. Pp. 79—84. 2. require otherwise confidential made district court's regardless how little, any, purely material they contain. In implying such automatic, overly rigid; should afforded opportunity means short sought are clearly beyond range private Government agency. 85—94. 150 U.S.App.D.C. 233, 464 F.2d 742, reversed remanded. Roger C. Cramton, St. Johnsbury, Vt. petitioners. Ramsey Clark, Washington, D.C., respondents. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court. 1966, 552, provides agencies shall make public broad spectrum information, exempts its mandate certain specified categories including 552(b)(1), other than an agency agency,' 552(b)(5). It is construction scope these exemptions at issue here. 2 * Respondents' lawsuit began article appeared newpaper late July 1971. indicated received conflicting recommendations advisability test coming fall and, particular, noted 'latest recommendations' product 'a departmental under-secretary committee named investigate controversy.' Two days later, Congresswoman Patsy Mink, respondent, sent telegram urgently requesting 'immediate release report inter-departmental committee. .' When request denied, action commenced Mink 32 her colleagues House.1 3 Petitioners immediately moved ground materials specifically exempted subsections (b)(1) (b)(5) Act.2 support motion, filed affidavit John N. Irwin II, Under Secretary State. Briefly, states appointed Nixon Chairman 'Under Secretaries Committee,' part National Security Council system organized 'so he could use it instrument obtaining advice important questions relating our security.' Committee directed 1969 'to review annual program encompass within this requests authorization specific tests.' Results Committee's reviews transmitted 'in time allow him give them full consideration before events.' affidavit, stated pursuant 'the foregoing directions President,' proposed known 'Cannikin,' take place Amchitka Island, Alaska. said have consisted covering memorandum Irwin, Committee, five attached report, additional separately Irwin.3 Of total 10 documents, one, Environmental Impact Statement AEC, publicly dispute. Each claimed been 4 'prepared solely transmittal set forth views opinions individuals preparing so might fully apprised varying viewpoints no purpose.' addition, least eight (by now reduced six) remaining involve highly sensitive matter vital policy described having Order 10501.4 6 On strength showing petitioners, favor §§ Act. subsection withholding those bearing separate classification 10501: 'If (of documents) separable remainder may read without distortion meaning, too disclosed.' 237, 746. court instructed Judge 'looking toward possible separation purposes nondisclosure.' Ibid. 7 concluded contested fell Act, construed exemption shielding reflected internal memoranda, 'factual information' policymaking then (including, presumably, any 'nonsecret components' data' separated disclosed 'without impinging decisional processes intended protected exemption.' We certiorari, 405 974, 92 1196, 31 247 reverse Appeals. II 8 552,5 revision 3, section, Administrative Procedure 1002 (1964 ed.). Section generally recognized falling far goals came looked upon more statute statute. See S.Rep.No.813, 89th Cong., 1st Sess., (1965) (hereinafter S.Rep.No.813); H.R.Rep.No.1497, 2d 5—6 (1966); U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News p. 2418 H.Rep.No.1497). section plagued vague phrases, 'any function United States requiring secrecy interest.' Moreover, even 'matters official record' 'persons properly directly concerned' information. And provided remedy wrongful provisions stand sharp relief against 3. eliminates 'properly access, stating repeatedly public,' 'for inspection.' Subsection creates disclosures. These explicitly exclusive, 552(c), plainly up concrete, workable standards determining whether particular withheld must disclosed. Aggrieved citizens given speedy courts, where de novo sustain action.' 552(a)(3). Noncompliance orders punished contempt. 9 Without question, broadly conceived. seeks access long shielded unnecessarily view attempts create judicially enforceable right secure possibly unwilling hands. scheme represents congressional determination types Branch option keep confidential, chooses. As Senate explained, 'an easy task balance opposing interests, impossible one either. Success lies providing formula encompasses, balances, protects yet places emphasis fullest responsible disclosure.' 3.6 context Act's attempt provide 'workable formula' 'balances, interests,' claims over case considered. 11 sometimes Exemption) forced policy.' According duly Secret, CFR 280 (Jan. 1, 1970). That promulgated authority 1953, 18 Fed.Reg. 7049, since time, has served basis 'which interests defense.'7 do believe here Order. Nor so-called components.' Obviously, alternative available. But chose follow Executive's choice honored. 12 language chosen care. '(t)he change standard interest' delimit narrowly exception precise definition. phrase 'public 3(a) subject interpretations, often colored personal prejudices predilections. admits clear delineations.' 8. House similarly pointed 'both limits present phrase, interest,' gives area necessary definition' 9; 2426. Manifestly, dispel uncertainty respect affecting 'national Rather some standard, simply determined secret. itself sufficiently respect, legislative history disposes argument executive security classifications judicial insistence anyone who seek question them. Thus, Report 'citizens can agree restrictions protect advance policy, 10501.' pp. 9—10; 2427.8 Similarly, Representative Moss, Subcommittee considered bill, 'was recognize (No. 10501)' drafted conformity order.' Hearings Federal Public Records Law Operations, 52, 55 1965 Hearings). member Gallagher, legislation 'crystal bill way affects policy. areas most 112 Cong.Rec. 13659. 13 same sources untenable 10501 somehow insuficient purposes, contemplates issuance orders, authority, document want certainly adopt new procedures established own procedures—subject whatever limitations privilege hled impose ordering. Cf. v. Reynolds, 345 528, 97 L.Ed. 727 (1953). neither. utmost directness note preamble secret.' well aware obviously accepted determinations qualifying status (b)(1). patently unrealistic argue 'Order nothing first exemption.'9 14 What thus makes wholly claim soundness objecting citizen. also negates proposition authorizes single supposedly latter. error. 'are classified' 'pursuant 10501' involving 'highly fact documents' characterizations never disputed Accordingly, circumstances, duty 552(a)(3) therefore end.10 B 15 Disclosure conceded 'unclassified' resisted hereafter 5).11 invoked, alternatively, claimed. standing alone, sufficient establish involved intra-agency' memoranda 'letters' Branch. By terms, however, insofar 'would This discover Drawing line between what difficulties. many respects, rules governing discovery remained uncertain very beginnings Republic.12 best, applied rough analogies. For example, we know treated though prosecutor, civil plaintiff, defendant.13 inquiry into particularized needs individual seeking although ordinarily litigant. Still, demonstrates incorporate rule 'confidential advisory privileged Kaiser Aluminum Chemical Corp. States, 157 F.Supp. 939, 946, 141 Ct. Cl. 38, 49 (1958) (Reed, J.). Reed there stated: 16 'There opinion—the open, frank discussion subordinate chief administrative Id., Ct.Cl., 48. 17 importance underlying echoed again during analysis discussions 5: 'It comments legal writing writings subjected scrutiny. argued, merit, efficiency greatly hampered if, matters, prematurely 'operate fishbowl.' convinced merits general proposition, attempted consistent efficient operation.' 9. 19 10. held attach intragovernmental finite limits, litigation. case, production 'injurious consultative functions government protects.' Corp., supra, 49. absence jeopardize state secrets, see (1953), consisting compiled contained deliberative severable parties Government.14 applying privilege, courts camera, turned withheld.15 assume, therefore, legislated backdrop law, particularly expressly (5) Virtually different treatment reflecting hand, factual, investigative other.16 20 Nothing contrary construction. ultimately became S. 1160, introduced Congress, excluded: 21 dealing policy.'17 22 formulation designed '(a)ll records public.' S.Rep.No.1219, 88th (1964). (Emphasis original.) severely criticized, because did deal 'solely' matters. Documents mixed fact, inevitably, exemption, become public.18 result criticism, changed substantially form. cannot suggesting rendered disclosure. sensibly discarded wooden meant manifestly containing happened contain data. decision taken, embrace equally permitting merely placed opinion. appears us public's will governed flexible, common-sense approach parties' agencies. And, noted, extended continues extend appearing form compromising documents. 23 further that, 'low-level, routine, reports'19 contemplated 5, type case. Rather, submitted top-level officials, major significance, contain, nature, blending presentations necessarily U.S.App.D.C., F.2d, reasons, object 24 To extent, answered Appeals, remand disclose 'intertwined safely reason characterization accurate, go compromise confidentiality 5. 25 believe, rigid. invoked public'—without need—to confindential unmistakable implication below invoking forward inspection—no actually therein. mandates result. F.Supp., 947, 50: seems obvious purpose encouragement open expression somewhat impaired requirement submit evidence (in camera).' Plainly, situations, appropriate. need automatic. An opportunity, detailed affidavits oral testimony, satisfaction is, course, resisting disclosure, 552(a)(3), fails meet inspection, inspection. demonstrate, surrounding A representative selected show, excised constitute barebones matter. short, inevitable tool every Others proceeded theory entirety virtue process. remand, demonstrate propriety thereof, submitting 26 remanded proceedings 27 ordered. 28 Judgment 29 REHNQUIST took 30 STEWART, concurring. presents constitutional claims, issues regarding nature 'Executive Privilege.' involves effort invoke power reclassified 11652. meaning two exemptive 552. My Brother DOUGLAS says 'shambles' announced Court, ordained unquestioning deference 'secret' stamp. demonstrates, confirmed history, withholds once federal imposed requirement, 33 One suppose engendered fierce controversy precisely kind event opened legitimate defense. concerned people evaluated Congress. representatives ignorance, democratic process paralyzed. 34 Court's conspicuously failed attack problem my discusses. Instead, built stamp 'secret,' however cynical, myopic, corrupt been. BRENNAN dissenting admirably valiant deflect impact rigid His dissent focuses statutory ..' 'matter' 552(b) (1) written, end inquiry.* 36 points out, 'Congress ordering.' enacting chose, instead, decree blind acceptance fiat. 37 BRENNAN, whom MARSHALL joins, concurring part. 38 holds today concludes rule, may, instances, avoid through testimony. concur view, govern claimed, holding contrary. find face distinguishes Exemptions suggests none. 552(a)(3)—'the action'—is procedure prescribed Exemptions. 39 immunizes scrutiny 1970).1 reaching result, adopts flatly inconsistent indeed, unambiguous itself.2 plain words, added.) years passage classified. delegates classify heads, empowered Confidential, Secret. left sole discretion heads. exercising discretion, heads but, blanket classifications, regard content document. 3(b) 3(c) clear, policy' indiscriminately conjunction genuine secrecy: 40 'Physically Connected Documents. file group physically connected high handled accordance classification.' 41 'Multiple Classification. document, product, substance bear highest component. over-all classification, notwithstanding pages, paragraphs, sections, thereof classifications.' 42 Even concede,3 doubt response required' stated' 552(c),4 qualify Indeed, apparently accept conclusion 3(b): 43 'This sees unclassified, regarded incorporated file. extent position above-quoted paragraph deem terms (Freedom Act), enacted subsequently Order.' 236, 745. 44 Nevertheless, maintain rejected contention, correctly. 45 'The reasoning applies provision physically-connected Secrecy association favored. If non-secret 46 Petitioners' argument, adopted imputes intent authorize judges independently misconceives 3(c), emphasized, receive secrecy, promote constitutes genuinely secrecy. rectify situation, '(i)f 'non-secret' exclusively head representing authorized declssify Executive, sound determines 'be policy.'5 stops finds, components, release. unambiguously 552(a)(3): (district) flat defiance mandate.6 47 Appeals' plan word Houses proceeding ultimate agency's prevent becoming meaningless sanctioning discretion.' S.Rep.No. 813, cited H.R.Rep.No.1497). granted, purposely so, grant 'authority whenever considers equitable appropriate enjoin improperly withheld.' Admin. News underscore traditional '(p)lacing proof agency' justify withholding. 8; rejection inexplicable overwhelming design. 48 reliance isolated references erroneous misleading. passing reference Report, superficial reading reveals suggestive kinds classify. remotely implies immunizing entire stamped calls Congressmen Moss Gallagher floor. face, confirm written awareness existence 10501. Certainly, significance debating construing statute,7 hardly more, decade debated Yet, found either Report. seem odd, say least, attribute reference' concession 'physically documents,' Order, immune serves reinforce mere immunize identical 50 insupportable light cogent confirmation supplied itself. direct revoked replaced 11652, manner camera. issued March 8, 1972, effective June 5209 (Mar. 10, 1972), attributes desire accommodate objectives Act: 51 best making affairs readily public. concept informed citizenry current policies branch.' 52 his statement accompanying promulgation signed based reexamination rationale Act.' Presidential 542 13, 1972). 53 recites 'some bears effectiveness conduct relations' '(t)his material, referred order, (the Act).' comply carefully 4(A) provides: 54 'Documents General. practicable, marked indicate classified, level, facilitate excerpting use.' emphasized statement: 56 'A source unnecessary old practical impossibility discerning classification. Incorporation paper another usually resulted innocuous neither released.' 544 1972) (emphasis added). 57 course true, observes, 'provides separating done Judiciary Ante, 85, n. lends precluding enforce effect remainder. explicit keystone plan, deemed 'essential (to) ordinary principle allowed (the) (that exempt) doing foreclose fact.' Cowles Communications Department Justice, 325 726, (ND Cal. 1971). Accord, Frankel SEC, 336 675, 677 (SDNY 1971), rev'd grounds, 460 813 (CA2 1972); Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. HUD, 343 1176, 1180 (ED Pa. 1972).8 58 interpretation complete bar frustrates objective nullity review. role becomes 'meaningless discretion,' incorporating requirement. 59 DOUGLAS, dissenting. 60 starting point indicates philosophy expressed 61 Henry Steels Commager, historian, recently wrote: 62 generation nation thought instruments Old World tyranny committed democracy permitted to. Now almost everything Pentagon CIA shrouded Not American suspects, (witness 'unauthorized' bombing North last winter) darkness.' New York Review Books, Oct. 7. 63 after certiorari 6, substituted dated that: 64 While 'classified material' 4(A). goes say: 'Material materials, reveal 65 clash meshes 'jurisdiction complainant.' prescribe employed 66 together mean minimum suppressed portion-by-portion 552(a) (3) collaborate effectuated. 67 exceedingly opinion, proceed follows: 68 unclassified nonetheless umbrella file, sure states: apply are—(1) Unless appendage falls refuge reads 69 routinely 10; 2428. while staff exempt, not. Ibid.; uniformly agreed Soucie David, 145 144, 448 1067; Grumman Aircraft Eng. Renegotiation Bd., 138 App.D.C. 147, 425 578; Long Island R. Co. 318 490; Consumers Union Veterans Admin., 301 796. 70 Facts cases. event, prevails. facts separated, allows publicity facts. 71 552(c) seal when says: limit availability public, except section.' Disclosure, rather save exceptions (b). 72 escape 'Top Secret' 'Secret' barrier performance majority sacrosanct, thereby scrutiny, colorably related ever knows convenient use, covers perhaps decades footprints nervous bureaucrat wary executive. repeat Gravel 408 606, 641—642, 2614, 2633, 2634, 583 (dissenting opinion): 74 '(A)s revealed expose Papers, Lai massacres, Gulf Tonkin 'incident,' Bay Pigs invasion, suppresses damaging news highlights favorable news. filtering officials' suppression withhold '99 1/2%' cases danger security. refuse publish 'classified' reports times relegate publisher distributing press releases silent; printed 'leaks' arm officialdom, critic. obtains free print fear retribution, contains future, planning Government.' 75 aghast judge's looking files disdain prospect area. business declassifying 'secrets,' familiar stuff deal. 76 misconceive distort dreamed trial judge declassify second normal Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 26, detached litigants confronting lawsuits. 77 things, much-advertised shambles.1 trusted, hold sway ipse dixit day Secret.' upset formula,' heart scheme, carte blanche insulate discernible relation remember words Madison: 78 popular Government, acquiring it, Prologue Farce Tragedy; or, both. Knowledge forever ignorance: Governors themselves knowledge gives.'2 affirm below. APPENDIX TO OPINION OF J., DISSENTING 79 Sections (c) 80 are— 81 policy; 82 (2) personnel practices agency; 83 statute; 84 (4) trade secrets commercial financial obtained person confidential; 85 86 (6) medical similar unwarranted invasion privacy; 87 (7) investigatory enforcement 88 (8) examination, operating, condition by, behalf of, regulation supervision institutions; (9) geological geophysical data, maps, wells. 89 section. Nuclear Responsibility Seaborg (D.C., Civ. Action 1346—71). After adverse decisions below, plaintiffs injunction November 1971, denied application, Responsibility, Schlesinger, 404 917, 242, 191 conducted day. respondents 'have exhausted remedies (and) complied applicable regulations.' contest assertions. dismissal capacities reach issue. following documents: A. President, 17, B. Committee. Attached letter, Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Irwin. Defense Program Dr. Kissinger Chairman. Cannikin test, AEC 102(c) Policy 1969, Stat. 853, 4332(C). always 'publicly available' copy affidavit. 4. transcript briefing Environment Quality unclassified. addition (with documents), Irwin: letter William Ruckelshaus, Protection Agency. declassified. Russell Train, Quality. Although concede 'only Undersecretary's Report.' Brief Edward E. Jr., Office Science Technology. 'Restricted Data 1954, amended. (42 (§§ 2014(y)), 2161 2162.)' asserted provisions, 552(b)(3), statute.' passed 383, codified 1967. 54. (ibid.): delineated .. 'At 'freedom rights privacy files, records. operation Bureau Investigation. conclude must, necessity, abrogated subordinated. 6. superseded, 5209, relations.' Portions connection (see supra). already Clearly, presidential departments, agencies, units branch hereinafter specified.' 281. 1970) disagree delegation delegated exercised cases, nevertheless remains President's respect. Respondents 18. 11652 7, supra), specifies 'is Title Code.' comparable recital, sheerest ritualism distinguish basis. respondents' apparent justifiable absurdity maintaining irrelevant undermined portions, practicable. 5212. contrary, Judiciary, like predecessor, declassification procedures. More importantly, exercises continuing responsibility affect recognizes leaving developed, 552 '(a) '(b) '(5) are: CEQ Train Ruckelshaus J. Moore, Practice 26.61 (1972) authorities collected (id., 26.61(1) 2) Moore); Wigmore, Evidence 2378, 2379 (McNaughton rev. 1961) Wigmore). There early disputes privilege. Chief Marshall's Burr, Fed.Cas. 14,692d) 187, 191—192 14,694) (CCD Va.1807), discussed Wigmore 2371, 739—741 741 (3d ed. 1940) Moore 26.61(6. 4). 805 21. Different situation. See, e.g., Andolschek, 142 503, 506 1944) (L. Hand, J.) (United prosecutor); Bank Line, Ltd. 801 1948) defendant). actions sanctions—short disclosure—such striking dismissing Government's action. Machin Zuckert, 114 335, 316 336, cert. 375 896, 192, 124 (1963) (Air Force Accident Investigation Report); Boeing Airplane Coggeshall, 108 106, 112—113, 654, 660—661 (1960) (Renegotiation Board documents); Olson Rug NLRB, 291 655, 662 (CA7 (no NLRB 'exclusively recommendations'); Carl Zeiss Stiftung V. Zeiss, Jena, F.R.D. 318, 327 (DC 1966), aff'd 128 384 979, 389 952, 334, 361 (1967) (discovery 'wholly opinions, deliberations'); McFadden Avco 278 57, 59—60 (MD Ala.1967), Cotton Valley Operators Comm., 719, 720 (WD La.1949), divided court, 339 940, 793, 94 1356 (1950), offered abstract (FBI reports). eg., 340, 341 (private tort action; Air 114, (excess profits tax redetermination); contempt proceedings); O'Keefe Co., 329, 1965) Reports); Rosee Trade, 684, 687—688 Ill.1965); supra (civil antitrust suit). Procter Gamble 485, 492 (NJ 1960) (criminal prosecution). 2379, id., 812. Ct.Cl. (1958), refused plaintiff's failure definite 50, 'objective facts' 'otherwise available.' 48—49. 1067 (1971); 151, 578, 582 (1970); Bristol-Myers FTC, 424 935 International Paper FPC, 438 1349, 1358—1359 (CA2), 827, 61, General Services Benson, 415 878 (CA9 1969), aff'g 289 590 Wash.1969); 490, 499 (EDNY 796 appeal dismissed moot, 436 1363 1971); Olsen Camp, 328 728, 731 Mich.1970); Reliable Transfer Rules appear Proposed Rule 509(a)(2)(A) defines 'official include 'intragovernmental functions.' 509(c) '(i)n examination itself.' 1336, 1758, 1879 broadened originally 'relating disposition adjudicatory rulemaking matters.' 1666, Sess. (1964), 110 17086. protecting adjudication rulemaking. 1666 1663 202—203, (1963). 36, 94—95, 205, 236 244, 366—367, 382—383, 402—403, 406—407, 417, 437, 445—446, 450, 490. 27—28, 49, 208, 220, 223—224, 229—230, 245—246, 255—257. Examples statements Aviation Administration (1965 446): 'Few entirely devoid papers relatively unprotected. Staff working exemptions.' Commerce Hearings, 406): provision, information.' Tr. Oral Arg. 23. Similarly forbids Here, too, statute, unwise, self-protective, inadvertent enactment be. (be narrowly).' 157, 1067, 1080 (1971). express Wellford Hardin, 444 21, (CA4 Petition Cert. Congress.' emphasizes heavy non-disclosure: (§ 552(c)) publication 552(b)).' commentator cogently argues 'pull 'specifically' language' exemptions. clause notes, relevant proper K. Davis, 3A.15, (Supp. Preliminary Analysis, U.Chi.L.Rev. 761 (1967). study background, Note, Comments Amendments Bill, Notre Dame Law. 417 (1965). Developments Law—The Interest Civil Liberties, Harv.L.Rev. 1130, 1224—1225 (1972). '(G)iven level enclosed, released Because secret,' ensure overall being unprivileged papers, reviewing inspect litigant.' Law, 1223. Schwegmann Bros. Calvert Distillers 384, 395, 397, 745, 751, 752, 95 1035 (1951) (Jackson, concurring) (Frankfurter, dissenting). automatically activates 52(b)(1), rely Epstein Resor, 421 930 confirms request, begun paper-by-paper basis.' here—namely, precludes review—Epstein '(I)n easier unlikely Act) (a)(3) circumstances (subsection) specify conditions truth exist.' 932—933. deference, helps shampbles swallowing exceptions. 'excerpting' material. Refereeing excerpted task. 552(b)(5), keeps 'interagency uses final 'memorandums letters' alleged 'improperly withheld,' 'determine novo,' 'burden' Hence, behind here, establishes fact/opinion distinction discovery. excerpted. answers shambles mechanism tried create. interplay listed 552(b), Appendix dissent. Letter W. Barry, Aug. 4, 1822, Writings James Madison 103 (Hunt 1910).

Category: 4