The problem with that approach is that varying the length of the redacted text would effectively alter the document and forever muddy the waters as to what the

The problem with that approach is that varying the length of the redacted text would effectively alter the document and forever muddy the waters as to what the original text could be. This would likely result in endless speculation that what might be released at a later date is not, in fact, the original text. It also makes it much more difficult to assess whether or not fighting to get one or more parts of redacted text released is worthwhile. (i.e. what appears to be a name or phrase in one area might not be deemed important vs a page and a half in another or vice versa) So let's say Congress takes this to court and gets an order requiring the A.G. to disclose the contents of one or more sections/types of redactions. There would likely be little confidence that any future unredacted text they receive was the original text rather than yet another modified version of it (i.e. maybe one or more words would be added/removed etc.) By disclosing the exact length of the text, as imperfect a solution as that is, it makes it likely that any future alterations can be more easily detected.