3 ms·

I didn't know they had mechanisms like this to prevent divulging of public information, so this is definitely news to me. I don't think dismissing something you

• smsm42 9y ago
  > I didn't know they had mechanisms like this to prevent divulging of public information, so this is definitely news to me Well, the mechanism is simple - you send FOIA request, they decline it because national security, or some regulation, or policy, or it's too hard, or pick another of 10 thousand excuses they can find. Or they send you the documents with all text blacked out (that happened too). Next step, you have to sue, because while they can play any games they want with a regular citizen, with complete impunity, playing the same with a judge would be much more risky and only very well-connected people like top federal officials can get away with it. The rest would probably choose to comply. > I don't think dismissing something you know to be true as "business as usual" helps. I'm not dismissing it. I'm saying the title implied agencies retaliate against requestors by suing them, it is misleading - they are doing the same thing as before, clamming up and refusing to provide records. It is still important, but the title is misleading since it gives wrong impression about what's going on. > There's nothing misleading about the title: they are suing to prevent disclosure. But the title doesn't say that, and if somebody tells you somebody sued you, that's not the first thing you think of.