4 ms·

Is this not a super standard FOIA response?

by ryanlol 5y ago

ceejayoz 5y ago
Only if there's an active law enforcement investigation the FOIA request touches.
- ryanlol 5y ago
  I don’t think that your comment acknowledges the reality that FOIA responses are decided by RNG unless you sue.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Only if there's an active law enforcement investigation the FOIA request touches. Right, but that doesn't mean that the named entity is either the target or even a subject of the investigation. Because the FOIA request is for all documents relating to the entity, if there is even one document related to any investigation of anything that mentions the named entity in any capacity, it is going to be withheld for that reason.
ajkdhcb2 5y ago
Yes. The tweet crops out a following paragraph that says it should not be taken as evidence that an investigation is underway. So this is fake news. You can see the full letter here: https://twitter.com/CryptoWhale/status/1429819156052983816 https://twitter.com/CryptoWhale/status/1429819156052983816
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  "We can't give you these records because it'd interfere with law enforcement activities, which may not exist" seems like it'd be a pretty big loophole in FOIA if you could use it that way.
  - kube-system 5y ago
    That's not what it's saying. They didn't say law enforcement activities didn't exist, they said a violation of the law may not exist. In the case of literally any law enforcement activity, information is collected before law enforcement can come to any conclusion whether or not a law was broken.
    - ceejayoz 5y ago
      > they said a violation of the law may not exist The claim made is "under undisclosed SEC investigation", not "has already been convicted". A FOIA response of this nature indicates there's some level of investigation occurring, or they couldn't use that reason and would have to find another reason to deny it.
      - ajkdhcb2 5y ago
        >A FOIA response of this nature indicates there's some level of investigation occurring How is that possible when it says "the Commission does not disclose the existence or non-existence of an investigation"?
        ceejayoz 5y ago
        If there were no investigation, they couldn't legally use that FOIA rejection reason. They'd have to give a different reason.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        ajkdhcb2 5y ago
        The question itself presupposes that there is an investigation, so they are essentially saying that if there were such materials it would be covered by that reason. FOIA would be abused like crazy to unearth classified information if this method of questioning worked
- bhouston 5y ago
  Others are now reporting this such as coin desk: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/09/24/sec-hints-at-tether-probe-in-records-request-denial/ https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/09/24/sec-hints-at-teth...
  - ajkdhcb2 5y ago
    The same form of letter was sent a month ago, so that just reflects badly on them

Is this not a super standard FOIA response?

ceejayoz 5y ago

Only if there's an active law enforcement investigation the FOIA request touches.

ryanlol 5y ago
I don’t think that your comment acknowledges the reality that FOIA responses are decided by RNG unless you sue.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> Only if there's an active law enforcement investigation the FOIA request touches. Right, but that doesn't mean that the named entity is either the target or even a subject of the investigation. Because the FOIA request is for all documents relating to the entity, if there is even one document related to any investigation of anything that mentions the named entity in any capacity, it is going to be withheld for that reason.

ajkdhcb2 5y ago

Yes. The tweet crops out a following paragraph that says it should not be taken as evidence that an investigation is underway. So this is fake news. You can see the full letter here: https://twitter.com/CryptoWhale/status/1429819156052983816 https://twitter.com/CryptoWhale/status/1429819156052983816

ceejayoz 5y ago
"We can't give you these records because it'd interfere with law enforcement activities, which may not exist" seems like it'd be a pretty big loophole in FOIA if you could use it that way.
- kube-system 5y ago
  That's not what it's saying. They didn't say law enforcement activities didn't exist, they said a violation of the law may not exist. In the case of literally any law enforcement activity, information is collected before law enforcement can come to any conclusion whether or not a law was broken.
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    > they said a violation of the law may not exist The claim made is "under undisclosed SEC investigation", not "has already been convicted". A FOIA response of this nature indicates there's some level of investigation occurring, or they couldn't use that reason and would have to find another reason to deny it.
    - ajkdhcb2 5y ago
      >A FOIA response of this nature indicates there's some level of investigation occurring How is that possible when it says "the Commission does not disclose the existence or non-existence of an investigation"?
      - ceejayoz 5y ago
        If there were no investigation, they couldn't legally use that FOIA rejection reason. They'd have to give a different reason.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        ajkdhcb2 5y ago
        The question itself presupposes that there is an investigation, so they are essentially saying that if there were such materials it would be covered by that reason. FOIA would be abused like crazy to unearth classified information if this method of questioning worked
bhouston 5y ago
Others are now reporting this such as coin desk: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/09/24/sec-hints-at-tether-probe-in-records-request-denial/ https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/09/24/sec-hints-at-teth...
- ajkdhcb2 5y ago
  The same form of letter was sent a month ago, so that just reflects badly on them