Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-24T04:41:32.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adjudicating Executive Privilege: Federal Administrative Agencies and Deliberative Process Privilege Claims in U.S. District Courts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Gbemende E. Johnson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Government transparency is a key component of democratic accountability. The U.S. Congress and the president have created multiple legislative avenues to facilitate executive branch transparency with the public. However, when the executive branch withholds requested information from the public, the federal judiciary has the power to determine whether agencies must release documents and information to requestors. When enforcing standards of executive branch transparency, judges must balance concerns of executive autonomy and judicial intrusion into administrative decisionmaking. While much judicial scholarship focuses on the decisionmaking on high courts, in the U.S. context, federal district courts play a key role in adjudicating transparency disputes. In this article, I examine case outcomes in disputes involving agency claims of deliberative process privilege over internal agency documents litigated between 1994 and 2004. I find that U.S. federal district courts largely defer to administrative agencies in transparency disputes. However, factors such as agency structure and the congruence between judicial and administrative agency policy preferences influence whether federal judges require executive branch officials to release requested information.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 53 , Issue 3 , September 2019 , pp. 823 - 850
Copyright
© 2019 Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aberbach, Joel D. & Rockman, Bert A. (2009) “The Appointments Process and the Administrative Presidency,” 39 Presidential Studies Q. 38–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellver, A. & Kaufmann, D. (2005) Transparenting Transparency: Initial Empirics and Policy Applications' Paper presented at IMF conference on transparency and integrity, 6–7 July 2005. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWBIGOVANTCOR/Resources/Transparenting_Transparency171005.pdf (accessed May 30, 2019.)Google Scholar
Bertelli, Anthony M. & Grose, Christian R. (2009) “Secretaries of Pork? A New Theory of Distributive Politics,” 71 J. of Politics 92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, Ryan C. & Boyd, Christina L. (2012) “U.S. Supreme Court Agenda Setting and the Role of Litigant Status,” 28 J. of Law, Economics, and Organizations 286–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, Christina L. (2010) Federal District Court Judge Ideology Data. Available at: http://cLboyd.net/ideology.html (accessed July 9, 2015).Google Scholar
Boyd, Christina L. (2015) “Opinion Writing in the Federal District Courts,” 36 Justice System J. 254–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, Christina L. & Sievert, Jacqueline (2013) “Unaccountable Justice? The Decision Making of Magistrate Judges in the Federal District Courts,” 34 Justice System J. 249–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Jowei & Johnson, Tim (2015) “Federal Employee Unionization and Presidential Control of the Bureaucracy: Estimating and Explaining Ideological Change in Executive Agencies,” 27 J. of Theoretical Politics 151–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clinton, Joshua D. & Lewis, David E. (2008) “Expert Opinion, Agency Characteristics, and Agency Preferences,” 16 Political Analysis 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clinton, Joshua, et al. (2012) “Separated Powers in the United States: The Ideology of Agencies, Presidents, and Congress,” 56 American J. of Political Science 341–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Jeffrey E. (1986) “The Dynamics of the “Revolving Door” on the FCC,” 30 American J. of Political Science 689–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowley, Donald W. (1987) “Judicial Review of Administrative Agencies: Does the Type of Agency Matter?” 40 Western Political Q. 265–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devins, Neal & Lewis, David E. (2008) “Not-So Independent Agencies: Party Polarization and the Limits of Institutional Design,” 88 Boston Univ. Law Rev. 459–498.Google Scholar
Fix, Michael P. (2014) “Does Deference Depend on Distinction? Issue Salience and Judicial Decision Making in Administrative Law Cases,” 35 Justice System J. 122–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galanter, Marc (1974) “Why the “Haves” Come out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change,” 9 Law & Society Rev. 95–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerstein, Josh (2016) “Obama Signs FOIA Reform Bill.” Politico: Under the Radar, June 30. Available at: https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/06/obama-signs-foia-reform-bill-225010 (accessed 1 November 2017).Google Scholar
Ginsberg, Wendy, et al. (2012) Government Transparency and Secrecy: An Examination of Meaning and Its Use in the Executive Branch. CRS Report for Congress, Congressional Research Service. Available at: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R42817.pdf (accessed 14 October 2015).Google Scholar
Gordon, Rachel A. (2012) Applied Statistics for the Social and Health Sciences. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halstuk, Martin E. & Chamberlin, Bill F. (2006) “The Freedom of Information Act 1966-2006: A Retrospective on the Rise of Privacy Protection over the Public Interest in Knowing What the Government's Up To,” 11 Communication Law and Policy 511–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Michael Ray (2009) “Standing in the Way of Judicial Review: Assertion of the Deliberative Process Privilege in APA Cases,” 53 St. Louis Univ. Law J. 349–416.Google Scholar
Hattem, Julian (2016) “Court Overturns Order Keeping 'Fast and Furious' Documents Secret.” The Hill. Available at: https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/269261-court-overturns-order-keeping-fast-and-furious-docs-secret (accessed January 2019).Google Scholar
Haynie, Stacia L. & Dumas, Tao L. (2014) “The Philippine Supreme Court and Regime Response, 1970-2000,” 9 Asian J. of Comparative Law 173–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hensch, Mark (2017) ACLU Files FOIA for Records on Comey Firing, May 15. Available at: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/fbi/333466-aclu-files-foia-seeking-comey-firing-records (accessed 16 May 2017).Google Scholar
Hollyer, James R., Peter Rosendorff, B., & Vreeland, James Raymond (2011) “Democracy and Transparency,” 73 The J. of Politics 1191–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horwitz, Sari (2011) “Operation Fast and Furious: A Gunrunning Sting Gone Wrong.” The Washington Post, July 14. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-anti-gunrunning-effort-turns-fatally-wrong/2011/07/14/gIQAH5d6YI_story.html (accessed 13 October 2014).Google Scholar
Horwitz, Sari & O'Keefe, Ed (2012) “Fast and Furious Scandal: House Panel Votes to Hold Eric Holder in Contempt.” The Washington Post, July 21. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/fast-and-furious-scandal-obama-exerts-executive-privilege-house-panel-moves-forward-with-contempt-vote/2012/06/20/gJQAGImIqV_story.html?utm_term=.86b226216032 (accessed 15 October 2017).Google Scholar
Howell, William (2003) Power without Persuasion: The Politics of Direct Presidential Action. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphries, Martha Ann & Songer, Donald R. (1999) “Law and Politics in Judicial Oversight of Federal Administrative Agencies,” 61 The J. of Politics 207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, Kirk (1999) “The Reasonable Government Official Test: A Proposal for the Treatment of Factual Information under the Federal Deliberative Process Privilege,” 49 Duke Law J. 561–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Gbemende (2014) “Judicial Deference and Executive Control over Administrative Agencies,” 14 State Politics and Policy Q. 142–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Kevin (2016) “Judge Rejects Privilege Claim in 'Fast and Furious' Inquiry.” USA Today, January 19. Available at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/01/19/judge-fast-and-furious-atf/79012328/ (accessed 30 April 2019).Google Scholar
Johnson, Timothy R. (2003) “The Supreme Court, the Solicitor General, and the Separation of Powers,” 31 American Politics Research 426–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaheny, Erin B. & Rice, Kimberly J. (2010) “Threshold Rules as Tools of Deference? Circuit Judge Gatekeeping in Administrative Agency Cases,” 31 The Justice System J. 201–224.Google Scholar
Kamen, Al & Itkowitz, Colby (2014) Issa-Holder Feud Remains Fast, Furious. November 4. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/issa-holder-feud-remains-fast-furious/2014/11/04/1ad20e7c-6466-11e4-9fdc-d43b053ecb4d_story.html (accessed 21 April 2019).Google Scholar
Kapiszewski, Diana (2011) “Tactical Balancing: High Court Decision Making on Politically Crucial Cases,” 45 Law & Society Rev. 471–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Michael (2005) “Escaping the Fishbowl: A Proposal to Fortify the Deliberative Process Privilege,” 99 Northwestern Univ. Law Rev. 1769–1815.Google Scholar
Kwoka, Margaret (2013) “Deferring to Secrecy,” 54 Boston College Law Rev. 185–242.Google Scholar
Lewis, David (2003) Politics and the Politics of Agency Design. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, David (2008) The Politics of Presidential Appointments: Political Control and Bureaucratic Performance. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, J. S. (1997) Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. A Volume in the Sage Series for Advanced Quantitative Techniques. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Long, J. S. & Freese, Jeremy (2005) Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. College Station: StataCorp LP.Google Scholar
Mart, Susan Nevelow & Ginsburg, Tom (2014) “[Dis-]Informing the People's Discretion: Judicial Deference under the National Security Exemption of the Freedom of Information Act,” 66 Administrative Law Rev. 725.Google Scholar
Mastrogiacomo, Timothy (2010) “Showdown in the Rose Garden: Congressional Contempt, Executive Privilege, and in the Role of the Courts,” 99 The Georgetown Law J. 163–188.Google Scholar
McGuire, Kevin T. (1995) “Repeat Players in the Supreme Court: The Role of Experienced Lawyers in Litigation Success,” 57 The J. of Politics 187–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miles, Kristi A. (1988) “Shielding Agency Deliberations from FOIA Disclosure,” 57 The George Washington Law Rev. 1326.Google Scholar
Moe, Terry (1982) “Regulatory Performance and Presidential Administration,” 26 American J. of Political Science 197–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narayan, Shilpa (2008) “Proper Assertion of the Deliberative Process Privilege: The Agency Head Requirement,” 77 Fordham Law Rev. 1183–1220.Google Scholar
Nixon, David C. (2004) “Separation of Powers and Appointee Ideology,” 20 J. of Law, Economics, and Organization 385–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raso, Connor (2015) “Agency Avoidance of Rulemaking Procedures,” Administrative Law Rev. 67(1), 65–132.Google Scholar
Revesz, Richard L. (1997) “Environmental Regulation, Ideology, and the DC Circuit,” 83 Virginia Law Rev. 1717–1772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, R. (2012) Executive Branch Socialization and Deference on the US Supreme Court. Law & Society Review, 46(4), 889–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, Morton (2008) Presidential Claims of Executive Privilege: History, Law, Practice and Recent Developments. CRS Report for Congress. July 5, 2007. Available at: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RL30319.pdf (accessed 6 August 2017).Google Scholar
Rozell, Mark J. (1984) “In Defense of Executive Privilege: Historic Developments and Modern Imperatives,” 59 International Social Science Rev. 67–81.Google Scholar
Sanchez-Urribarri, Raul (2011) “Courts between Democracy and Hybrid Authoritarianism: Evidence from the Venezuelan Supreme Court,” 36 Law & Social Inquiry 854–884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuck, Peter H. & Donald Elliot, E. (1990) “To the Chevron Station: An Empirical Study of Federal Administrative Law,” 984 Duke Law J. 996–1054.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A. & Spaeth, Harold (2002) The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selin, Jennifer (2015) “What Makes an Agency Independent?” 59 American J. of Political Science 971–987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheehan, Reginald (1990) “Administrative Agency and the Court: A Reexamination of the Impact of Agency Type on Decisional Outcomes,” 43 Western Political Q. 875–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheehan, Reginald (1992) “Federal Agencies and the Supreme Court: An Analysis of Litigation Outcomes, 1953–1988,” 20 American Politics Q. 478–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Joseph L. (2007) “Presidents, Justices, and Deference to Administrative Action,” 23 J. of Law, Economics, and Organization 346–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stempel, Jonathan (2017) Groups Sue to Obtain White House Visitor Logs. April 10. Available at: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-foia-idUSKBN17C2J3 (accessed 21 April 2017).Google Scholar
Stephenson, Matthew C. (2004) “Mixed Signals: Reconsidering the Political Economy of Judicial Deference to Administrative,” 56 Administrative Law Rev. 657–738.Google Scholar
Tomlinson, Edward (1984) “Use of the Freedom of Information Act for Discovery Purposes,” 43 Maryland Law Rev. 119–202.Google Scholar
Unah, Isaac (1997) “Specialized Courts of Appeals' Review of Bureaucratic Actions Protectionism,” 50 Political Research Q. 851–878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verkuil, Paul R. (2002) “An Outcome Analysis of Scope of Review Standards,” 44 William and Mary Law Rev. 679–735.Google Scholar
Weaver, Russell L. & Jones, James T. R. (1989) “The Deliberative Process Privilege,” 54 Missouri Law Rev. 279–321.Google Scholar
Wendy, Hansen L., Johnson, Renee J., & Unah, Isaac (1995) “Specialized Courts, Bureaucratic Agencies, and the Politics of U.S. Trade Policy,” 39 American J. of Political Science 529–557.Google Scholar
Wetlaufer, Gerald (1990) “Justifying Secrecy: An Objection to the General Deliberative Privilege,” 65 Indiana Law J. 845–924.Google Scholar
Wood, B. Dan & Waterman, Richard W. (1991) “The Dynamics of Political Control of the Bureaucracy,” 85 American Political Science Rev. 801–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Johnson supplementary material
Download undefined(File)
File 59.4 KB