Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/56153743/CREW-v-FEC-D-D-C-Regarding-FEC-Commissioners-Communications-5-23-2011-Complaint
Timestamp: 2016-10-21 11:46:35
Document Index: 58824407

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 1331', '§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 552', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 552', '§ 552', 'art 1', 'art 3']

BrowseBrowseInterestsBiography & MemoirBusiness & LeadershipFiction & LiteraturePolitics & EconomyHealth & WellnessSociety & CultureHappiness & Self-HelpMystery, Thriller & CrimeHistoryYoung AdultBrowse byBooksAudiobooksComicsSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoinBooksAudiobooksComicsSheet MusicIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIACITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON 1400 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 450 Washington, D.C. 20005 Plaintiff,
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 999 E Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20463 Defendant.
1. This is an action under the Freedom ofInformation Act ("FOIA"), 5 U.S.c. § 552, as amended, challenging the failure of the Federal Election Commission ("FEC" or "Commission") to fulfill the request of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington ("CREW") for records related to communications of three FEC commissioners with individuals and entities outside the Commission, and the calendars and other recordations of meetings and appointments of these commissioners. 2. This case seeks declaratory relief that the FEC is in violation of the FOIA for failing to fulfill plaintiffs request for records, and injunctive relief that the FEC immediately and fully comply with CREW's request under the FOIA.
3. This Court has both subject matter jurisdiction over this action and personal jurisdiction over the parties pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B). This Court also has jurisdiction
over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Venue lies in this district under 5 U.S.C.
4. Plaintiff CREW is a nonprofit corporation, organized under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. CREW is committed to protecting the right of citizens to be informed about the activities of government officials and to ensuring the integrity of government officials. CREW seeks to empower citizens to have an influential voice in government decisions and in the governmental decision-making process through the dissemination of information about public officials, federal agencies and entities, and their actions. To advance its mission, CREW uses a combination of research, litigation, and advocacy. As part of its research, CREW uses government records made available to it under the FOIA. 5. CREW has invested considerable organizational resources in pushing the U.S. government to take ethics issues seriously. CREW monitors closely the laws and rules applicable to government agencies. 6. CREW will analyze the information it receives that is responsive to its request and will share it with the public through memoranda, reports, or press releases. In addition, CREW will disseminate any documents it acquires from its request to the public through its own website, www.citizensforethics.org, as well as another website on which CREW, among others, posts documents for public review, www.scribd.com. CREW's website also contains links to thousands of pages of documents CREW acquired from multiple FOIA requests. 7. CREW is harmed by the FEC's failure to comply with the FOIA because that failure harms CREW's ability to provide full, accurate and current information to the public on a matter of public interest. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)©. Absent this critical information, CREW cannot
advance its mission of educating the public to ensure the public continues to have a vital voice in government decisions. 8. Defendant FEC is an agency within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. § 552(f). The FEC has possession and control of the requested records and is responsible for fulfilling plaintiffs FOIA request.
9. The FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552, requires agencies of the federal government to release requested records to the public unless one or more specific statutory exemptions apply. 10. An agency must respond to a party making a FOIA request within 20 working days, notifying that party of at least the agency's determination whether or not to fulfill the request and of the requester's right to appeal the agency's determination to the agency head. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i). 11. In "unusual circumstances," an agency may delay its response to a FOIA request or appeal, but must provide notice and "the date on which a determination is expected to be dispatched." 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(B). 12. This Court has jurisdiction, upon receipt of a complaint, "to enjoin the agency from withholding agency records and to order the production of any agency records improperly withheld from the complainant." 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B).
FACTS UNDERLYING PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM FOR RELIEF
13. On March 7,2011, CREW sent a FOIA request to the FEC by facsimile seeking: (1) all correspondence related to any and all FEC business between Commissioners Matthew S.
Peterson, Caroline C. Hunter, or Donald F. McGhan II and any individual or entity outside of the FEC from the date each commissioner took office to the present; (2) all calendars, agendas, or other recordations of the schedules of Commissioners Peterson, Hunter, and McGhan; (3) all written ex parte communications delivered to an FEC ethics officer or Designated Agency Ethics Official (collectively "ethics official") by Commissioners Peterson, Hunter, and McGhan or by someone acting on their behalf pursuant to 11 C.F.R. §§ 7.l5(c), 201.3(c), 201.4(a); and (4) all statements setting forth the substance and circumstances of any oral ex parte communication prepared by any of these commissioners or by someone acting on their behalf and delivered to an ethics official pursuant to 11 C.F.R. §§ 7.15(d), 201.3©, 201.4(a). 14. CREW limited its requests for written ex parte communications and statements setting forth the substance and circumstances of oral ex parte communications to records in the possession of an ethics official. 15. CREW also requested a waiver of fees associated with the processing of its request. CREW explained the request concerns the operations of the federal government, the disclosures likely will contribute to a better understanding of relevant government procedures in a significant way, and the request primarily and fundamentally is for non-commercial purposes. Specifically, these records are likely to contribute to greater public awareness of ex parte communications between FEC commissioners and parties with business before the FEC, as well as whether commissioners are complying with their statutory obligation to deliver ex parte communications and prepare and deliver statements about them to FEC ethics officials. 16. CREW also requested it not be charged search or review fees because it qualifies as a representative of the news media under the FOIA. CREW explained how it routinely and
systematically disseminates information to the public, including through its frequently visited website www.citizensforethics.org, the website www.scribd.com on which CREW posts all of the documents it receives under the FOIA, an online newsletter that at that time had well over 16,000 subscribers, a blog, and CREW's numerous published reports that educate the public about government ethics and corruption. 17. By email dated March 8, 2011, the FEC acknowledged receipt of the request, and advised CREW its request for a fee waiver had been granted. 18. Following subsequent conversations and communications with FEC Assistant General Counsel for Administrative Law Nicole St. Louis Mathis, CREW agreed to exclude from the FEC's initial search the official files of federal campaign-related matters (such as Matters Under Review, enforcement actions, applications for public funding, audits, litigation, and advisory opinions) and rulemaking proceedings. In its letter of March 29,2011 setting forth this clarification, CREW explained that by agreeing to this procedure CREW was not narrowing the scope of its request. CREW also explained that after it reviewed the records the FEC produced by the initial search CREW would further clarify whether additional searches were needed to fulfill the request. 19. CREW also agreed to exclude from the request: (1) correspondence sent by one of the named commissioners in a federal campaign-related matter or rulemaking proceeding solely in his or her authorized capacity as Chair or Vice Chair to represent the commission, such as a subpoena or Reason to Believe finding; (2) correspondence docketed in a federal campaignrelated matter or rulemaking proceeding and received by one of the named commissioners solely as a carbon copy; and (3) correspondence forwarding official reports to other government 5
agencies or Congress and signed by one of the named commissioners solely in his or her authorized capacity as chair or vice chair, such as agency privacy reports or budget justifications. Further, CREW agreed that the word "meeting" as used in the request for notes of meetings did not include a hearing of the commission in an open or executive session. 20. To date, CREW has not received any documents from the FEC in response to its March 7,2011 FOrA request, nor has it received an estimated date by which the FEC will complete its processing of the request. 21. Plaintiff has now exhausted administrative remedies.
CLAIM ONE (Failure to Produce Records Under the FOIA) 22. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs. 23. Plaintiff, through its March 7,2011 FOrA request, properly asked for records within the FEC's control. 24. Defendant FEC has neither produced any records to CREW in response to its ForA request, nor made any explicit and justified claims of statutory exemption. 25. Plaintiff has exhausted the applicable administrative remedies with respect to defendant FEC's wrongful withholding of the records requested in plaintiffs March 7, 2011
ror» request.
26. The FEC violated the FOrA's mandate to release agency records to the public, by failing to release the records plaintiff specifically requested. 5 U.S. C. §§ 552(a)(3)(A), 552(a)(4)(B).
27. Accordingly, plaintiff is entitled to injunctive and declaratory relief with respect to the release and disclosure of the records requested in plaintiff's March 7, 2011 FOrA request.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court: (1) Declare that the FEC violated the Freedom ofInformation Act by failin g to lawfully satis fy plaintiff's March 7, 2011 FOrA request; (2) Order the FEC to process and release immediately all records responsive to plaintiff's March 7, 2011 FOrA reque st at no cost to plaintiff; (3) Retain jurisdiction of this action to ensure the proc essing of plaintiff' s ForA requ est and that no agency records are wrongfully withheld; (4) Award plaintiff its reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs in thi s action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E ); and (5) Grant such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Respectfully submitted,
J j )b;/
Dated: May 23,20 11
AboutBrowse booksSite directoryAbout ScribdMeet the teamOur blogJoin our team!Contact UsPartnersPublishersDevelopers / APILegalTermsPrivacyCopyrightSupportHelpFAQAccessibilityPressPurchase helpAdChoicesMembershipsJoin todayInvite FriendsGiftsCopyright © 2016 Scribd Inc. .Terms of service.Accessibility.Privacy.Mobile Site.Site Language: English中文EspañolالعربيةPortuguês日本語DeutschFrançaisTurkceРусский языкTiếng việtJęzyk polskiBahasa indonesiaCREW v. FEC (D.D.C.): Regarding FEC Commissioners' Communications: 5/23/2011 - Complaint by CREW25 viewsEmbedRelated interestsPlaintiff, United States Code, Federal Election Commission, Commissioner, Freedom Of Information Act (United States)DownloadDescriptionOn May 23, 2011, CREW filed a lawsuit against the FEC based on the agency’s failure to produce any documents in response to a Freedom of Information Act request seeking correspondence between FEC C...On May 23, 2011, CREW filed a lawsuit against the FEC based on the agency’s failure to produce any documents in response to a Freedom of Information Act request seeking correspondence between FEC Commissioners Matthew S. Peterson, Caroline C. Hunter, and Donald F. McGhan II and outside individuals and entities, CREW v. FEC (D.D.C.). CREW also is seeking all calendars and agendas for these commissioners as well as all written ex parte communications the commissioners sent to an FEC ethics officer. Through this FOIA request CREW seeks to learn the extent to which the three commissioners are complying with FEC regulations forbidding commissioners from engaging in ex parte communications with parties having business before the FEC.Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.Copyright: Public DomainDownload as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentShow moreShow less
Documents similar to CREW v. FEC (D.D.C.): Regarding FEC Commissioners' Communications: 5/23/2011 - ComplaintCREW v. FEC (D.D.C.): Regarding FEC Commissioners' Communications: 8/2/2011 - Memorandum Opinionby CREWResponsive Documents (3/7/11 FOIA) - CREW: FEC: Regarding FEC Commissioner's Communications: 6/15/2011 -FOIA 2011-30 - Part 1by CREWResponsive Documents (3/7/11 FOIA) - CREW: FEC: Regarding FEC Commissioner's Communications: 6/15/2011 -FOIA 2011-30 - Part 3by CREWBooks similar to CREW v. FEC (D.D.C.): Regarding FEC Commissioners' Communications: 5/23/2011 - ComplaintYour Right to Federal Records; Questions and Answers on the Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Actby BookBabyFBI Report: A Guide to Conducting Research in FBI Records, the FBI History Program - Presidential Libraries, Library of Congress, Papers of the Attorneys Generalby Progressive ManagementIpse Dixit: How the World Looks to a Federal Judgeby William L. DwyerDocuments about PlaintiffAmended Complaint Filed 9/30/2016 by LawNewzDoe v. Trump et al refiled complaint 9/30/16by davidbixTiffany Doe Declarationby LawNewz