Daily Caller v. U.S. Department of State
152 F. Supp. 3d 1
| D.D.C. | 2015Background
- In 2015 a 24-hour online news outlet submitted five FOIA requests to the State Department seeking documents related to Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server; the agency granted expedited processing and a fee waiver for those requests.
- The State Department acknowledged receipt but had not completed collection/review or produced more than a few records by late 2015; many responsive documents overlapped other high-volume Clinton-related FOIA litigation.
- The agency allocated substantial FOIA resources to related litigation (including compliance with a separate order requiring production of ~55,000 pages) and stated that senior reviewers with required security/diplomatic clearances would be available in early 2016.
- The requester sued and moved for a mandatory preliminary injunction compelling the Department to collect, review, and produce all non-exempt responsive documents (and provide a Vaughn index) within 20 business days.
- The State Department argued FOIA requires only that expedited requests be processed “as soon as practicable,” that the 20‑day statutory deadline governs only an initial determination, and that its current efforts and resource constraints constitute due diligence.
- The court denied the preliminary injunction, concluding the requester failed to satisfy the four-factor preliminary-injunction test and that the balance of equities and public interest weighed against imposing an arbitrary 20-day production deadline.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether FOIA requires production of responsive non-exempt records within 20 days | FOIA and regs impose a strict 20-business-day deadline for processing; expedited requests presumptively require production within that time | FOIA requires only an initial determination within 20 days; production must be "prompt" and expedited requests processed "as soon as practicable" given resources | Court: No strict 20-day production requirement; the 20-day rule governs initial determination and enables immediate judicial review if missed, but does not mandate immediate production |
| Whether the agency’s delay constitutes "exceptional circumstances" or lack of due diligence | Agency backlog and delays are predictable; thus they cannot rely on "exceptional circumstances" to extend processing | Fiscal 2015 had an unusual surge (~20% increase); substantial Clinton-related litigation and resource commitments justify delay and agency shows steps to address backlog | Court: Agency demonstrated unusual circumstances and due diligence such that delay is not unreasonable at this stage |
| Whether the plaintiff faces irreparable harm absent expedited production | Continued delay will irreparably harm the outlet’s ability to report timely on a breaking news story | Any harm is speculative or minimal because some records are already public and the agency assigned staff and expects production in early 2016 | Court: Plaintiff did not show irreparable harm sufficient to warrant extraordinary mandatory relief |
| Whether equities and public interest favor an injunction forcing 20-day production | Public interest in prompt disclosure and the plaintiff’s journalistic role favor acceleration | Forcing production would displace other expedited requesters, increase risk of improper disclosure, and undermine balanced FOIA processing | Court: Balance of equities and public interest weigh against imposing the requested mandatory deadline |
Key Cases Cited
- Aamer v. Obama, 742 F.3d 1023 (D.C. Cir.) (preliminary-injunction four-factor framework)
- Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, 555 U.S. 7 (2008) (injunctive relief requires clear showing of entitlement)
- Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. Fed. Election Comm’n, 711 F.3d 180 (D.C. Cir.) (distinguishing determination deadline from production requirement; court supervision and due-diligence standard)
- Milner v. U.S. Dep’t of Navy, 562 U.S. 562 (2011) (FOIA exemptions construed narrowly)
- Payne Enters., Inc. v. United States, 837 F.2d 486 (D.C. Cir.) (courts must prevent unreasonable FOIA delays)
- Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. Dep’t of Justice, 416 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C.) (expedited-processing precedent; facts matter in assessing practicability)