Malik v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Civil Action No. 2022-0698
D.D.C.Mar 11, 2025Background
- Adam Malik, a Texas immigration attorney and former DHS employee, had his Global Entry membership revoked after a contentious January 2021 re-entry at Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, during which he claims CBP officers interrogated and assaulted him, then seized his phone.
- Following the incident, Malik made broad FOIA requests to CBP, USCIS, ICE, FBI, and NARA seeking records related to the incident, his employment, security investigations, and Global Entry revocation.
- Dissatisfied with the agencies' responses—in particular, the scope of searches and redactions—Malik filed suit under the Freedom of Information Act, alleging bad faith and incomplete disclosures.
- The agencies provided declarations describing their searches and withheld records under various FOIA exemptions (3, 5, 6, 7(c), 7(e)).
- After mediation failed, both parties moved for summary judgment on the adequacy of searches and the applicability of exemptions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of Agency Searches | Agencies failed to produce known existing records; bad faith | Conducted reasonable, good-faith searches using relevant data | Agency affidavits sufficient; searches reasonable; no evidence of bad faith |
| Withholding/Redactions Under Exemptions | Improper/overbroad withholdings show bad faith | Withholdings justified under FOIA exemptions | Most exemptions justified; one USCIS memo inadequate explanation |
| Production of Video from Airport | Video existed but wasn't produced | Video retained 90 days, deleted before search | Agency explanation plausible; no evidence contradicts agency |
| Discovery, Summary Judgment Standard | Agency bad faith justifies discovery and summary judgment for Malik | No bad faith; summary judgment based on search adequacy | No discovery ordered; summary judgment mostly for defendants |
Key Cases Cited
- Oglesby v. U.S. Dep’t of Army, 79 F.3d 1172 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (sets FOIA summary judgment standards)
- Iturralde v. Comptroller of Currency, 315 F.3d 311 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (adequacy of FOIA searches is judged by search method, not result)
- SafeCard Servs., Inc. v. SEC, 926 F.2d 1197 (D.C. Cir. 1991) (speculation insufficient to rebut agency affidavits in FOIA cases)
- U.S. Dep’t of State v. Wash. Post Co., 456 U.S. 595 (1982) (Exemption 6 covers information applying to particular individuals)
- NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 421 U.S. 132 (1975) (deliberative process privilege under Exemption 5)
- U.S. Dep’t of Just. v. Reps. Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749 (1989) (privacy balancing under FOIA Exemptions 6 and 7(c))