Haleem v. Department of Defense
Civil Action No. 2023-1471
| D.D.C. | Jul 25, 2025Background
- Deen Haleem, a Master Sergeant in the U.S. Army Reserves, had his Top Secret security clearance revoked and sought records relating to this decision from the Department of Defense (DOD) via the FOIA and Privacy Act.
- Haleem received heavily redacted documents and learned other documents were completely withheld, prompting a follow-up request specifically targeting this information, which was denied.
- He subsequently filed suit under the FOIA and Privacy Act against DOD and the Department of Justice; the court later dismissed DOJ as a party.
- Earlier, the court ruled that most withholdings were justified under Privacy Act Exemption (k)(2) and FOIA Exemption 7(E), but ordered the release of 17 pages of computer code.
- DOD moved for reconsideration, arguing the release of these 17 pages posed security risks, and provided additional declarations explaining the potential threats posed by disclosure.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 17 pages of code are protected under FOIA 7(E) | Code is not meaningful to average person, so should release | Code, if disclosed, could help evade law enforcement and poses security risk | Pages may be withheld under FOIA 7(E) |
| Whether code must be released under the Privacy Act | DOD hasn't claimed a valid exemption under Privacy Act | Material is investigatory for law enforcement (k)(2) applies | Privacy Act permits withholding under (k)(2) |
| Standard for Rule 59(e) reconsideration | No new, material change justifying alteration | New or more detailed evidence meets Rule 59(e) standard | Rule 59(e) met; prior order modified |
| Foreseeable harm requirement for FOIA 7(E) | Foreseeable harm analysis required for exemption | FOIA 7(E) inherently requires circumvention risk analysis | No further foreseeable harm analysis necessary |
Key Cases Cited
- Blackwell v. FBI, 646 F.3d 37 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (explains the standard for FOIA Exemption 7(E) regarding law enforcement techniques and circumvention risk)
- Mayer Brown LLP v. IRS, 562 F.3d 1190 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (clarifies the low threshold for withholding under FOIA Exemption 7(E))
- Firestone v. Firestone, 76 F.3d 1205 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (discusses standards for granting a Rule 59(e) motion to reconsider a judgment)
- Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, 554 U.S. 471 (2008) (explains limits of Rule 59(e) motions)