Opinion ID: 586400
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: DOC's Other Arguments

Text: 32 DOC opposes Assembly's use of the adjusted block-level census because it might be less accurate in discrete local situations than the unadjusted census data, leading to public confusion. Although the Secretary chose not to adjust the census because he was not convinced that the adjusted numbers were more accurate than the unadjusted numbers, inaccuracy is not a basis for FOIA exemption. If the tapes are not protected by Exemption 5 because they are predecisional and deliberative, they must be disclosed. DOC has warned the public that both the unadjusted and adjusted data are inaccurate. DOC, perhaps predictably, worries that the adjusted data will be misused. However, it is not among FOIA's functions to control the use of disclosed information. The public, not DOC or the courts, should decide whether to heed DOC's warnings. 33 DOC also expresses fear that the Census Bureau's reputation for reliability would be diminished if it released information known to be inaccurate. The district court rejected this theory as a factual matter. Any harm to the Department's reputation has already occurred; because of the Department's candor, the public already knows that the block level data are inaccurate, and has a good idea of the extent of any inaccuracies. Order at 33 (citation omitted). Even if DOC could prove that its reputation would be harmed by disclosure, we note that the core purpose of FOIA is to allow the public to know what their government is up to. Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 773, 109 S.Ct. 1468, 1481, 103 L.Ed.2d 774 (1989). Concealing information from the public in order to protect agency reputations is precisely the sort of behavior FOIA was enacted to eliminate.