James Madison Project v. CIA, No. 18-03112, 2020 WL 5653577 (D.D.C. Sept. 23, 2020) (Brown Jackson, J.)

James Madison Project v. CIA, No. 18-03112, 2020 WL 5653577 (D.D.C. Sept. 23, 2020) (Brown Jackson, J.)

Re:  Request for records concerning "'any association or contractual agreements with (a) President Bush, (b) Zapata Petroleum Corporation or (c) Zapata Offshore Corporation . . . from 1953 to March 1, 1971'"

Disposition:  Granting in part and denying in part plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment

• Exemption 1:  "[B]ased on [defendant's] statements and 'the substantial deference owed to government [declarations] in [the national security] context,' the Court concludes that the CIA has sufficiently justified its withholding of records under Exemption 1."  The court relates that defendant "determined that some of the responsive records uncovered in the agency's search contained the 'names of covert personnel, locations of covert facilit[ies], subjects of intelligence interest, and information that would tend to reveal specific intelligence sources, methods and or activities.'"  "The declaration also describes the importance of protecting such information in order to 'prevent foreign adversaries, terrorist organizations, and others from learning about the ways in which the CIA operates, that would allow them to use countermeasures to undermine U.S. intelligence capabilities and render collection efforts ineffective.'"  "[Defendant] additionally explains that 'disclosing the identity of a covert employee could jeopardize the safety of the employee, his or her family, his or her sources, and other persons with whom he or she has had contact.'"  The court also finds that "because the twenty-five-year-old records discuss sources and methods that are 'still in active use,' they are exempt from automatic declassification under section 3.3(b) of the Executive Order."  "And with respect to the records that are over fifty years old, which also discuss methods still in use, the supplemental declaration notes that the Director of the CIA has exempted 'sensitive information that could reveal an intelligence method in active use[,]' and that the Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel has approved this exemption, consistent with sections 3.3(h) and (j) of the Executive Order."
   
• Exemption 6 & 7(C):  "The Court cannot make any determination with respect to the CIA's motion for summary judgment concerning its invocation of FOIA Exemptions 6 and 7(C)."  The court finds that "the declarations on which the CIA relies contain wholly conclusory and speculative assertions."  "What is more, the declarations also acknowledge that the CIA cannot determine whether the individuals mentioned in the records are alive or deceased . . . ."
   
• Litigation Considerations, "Reasonable Segregable" Requirements:  "[B]ased on the current record, the Court . . . cannot determine whether the CIA has released all reasonably segregable materials to Plaintiffs."  "For one thing, it is not at all clear that the CIA has properly withheld records under Exemptions 6 and 7(C) for the reasons just discussed."  "But perhaps even more importantly, the agency has not provided the Court with any means to assess the extent of its disclosures and redactions."