Opinion ID: 2308051
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Photograph of Abu Zubaydah

Text: Plaintiffs contend that the CIA failed to provide any justification for withholding a photograph of Abu Zubaydah taken while he was in CIA custody abroad and that the post hoc explanations offered by the Government's counsel do not suffice to justify the withholding. We disagree. In a June 8, 2009 unclassified declaration, Director Panetta explained that all of the records he reviewed in connection with his invocation of FOIA Exemptions 1 and 3, including the photograph, are related to the contents of 92 destroyed videotapes of detainee interrogations that occurred between April and December 2002. Panetta Decl. ¶ 3, June 8, 2009. Director Panetta further declared that miscellaneous documents in the sample records, including the photograph, contain[] TOP SECRET operational information concerning the interrogations of Abu Zubaydah. Id. ¶ 5. On appeal, the Government has expanded upon Director Panetta's justification for withholding by explaining that the photograph necessarily relates to an intelligence source or method because it records Abu Zubaydah's condition in the period during which he was interrogated. We have reviewed the photograph in camera. Our examination has been informed by our contemporaneous review of other sample records. Like the district court, we observe that a photograph depicting a person in CIA custody discloses far more information than the person's identity. We agree with the district court that the image at issue here conveys an aspect of information that is important to intelligence gathering, J.A. 1115, and that this information necessarily relates to an intelligence source or method. The Government's justification for withholding the photograph is thus both logical and plausible. See Wilner, 592 F.3d at 75. Moreover, Director Panetta's declaration is entitled to substantial weight, see Wolf, 473 F.3d at 374, and this Court must adopt a deferential posture in FOIA cases regarding the uniquely executive purview of national security, Wilner, 592 F.3d at 76 (internal quotation marks omitted). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's conclusion that the Government has adequately justified its withholding of the photograph under FOIA Exemption 3.