Touarsi v. United States Department of Justice
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7590
D.D.C.2015Background
- Touarsi, an Algerian who applied for asylum in the U.S., was detained by immigration/FBI on terrorism suspicions around 1999–2001, later granted asylum and now a U.S. citizen.
- In 2012 Touarsi submitted a FOIA request to the FBI seeking records about his arrest, detention, surveillance, and alleged government conduct; agencies produced ~200 pages and withheld ~350 pages under various exemptions.
- FBI, CBP, and ICE relied on FOIA Exemptions 1, 3, 5, 6, 7(C), 7(D), and 7(E) for withholdings; Touarsi sued after an administrative appeal failed.
- The parties did not dispute the adequacy of the agencies’ searches; the dispute is over the sufficiency of the agencies’ Vaughn descriptions, claimed exemptions, segregability, and related remedies.
- The court reviewed agency declarations and in camera submissions and granted summary judgment for the government, finding the exemptions and segregability showings adequate; it denied requests to expunge records and for attorney’s fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of Vaughn index / descriptions | Touarsi: agency descriptions are too categorical and lack document-by-document detail | Agencies: category-based descriptions and declarations sufficiently describe withheld categories and rationales | Court: category-based Vaughn acceptable; declarations + in camera review sufficient |
| Exemption 1 (classified/intel sources & methods) | Touarsi: redactions insufficiently specific; his non‑prosecution undermines national security claim | FBI: original classification authority explains disclosure would reveal intelligence sources, methods, file identifiers and harm national security | Court: Exemption 1 withheld properly; court defers to agency and in camera review supports harm rationale |
| Exemption 5 privileges (attorney-client, deliberative process) & misconduct claim | Touarsi: government misconduct alleged, so privileges should be waived; also challenges attorney-client/deliberative claims | Govt: no evidence of misconduct; attorney-client communications were confidential legal advice; CBP notes predecisional/deliberative | Court: plaintiff failed to show misconduct; privileges apply and CBP notes protected as deliberative |
| Exemptions 6 & 7(C) (privacy of third parties) | Touarsi: public interest in oversight of his detention justifies disclosure of names/information | Agencies: privacy interests of third parties, investigators, sources outweigh the incremental public interest; documents already produced suffice | Court: withheld identifying information properly; generalized oversight interest insufficient to overcome privacy exemptions |
| Exemption 7(D) (confidential informants) | Touarsi: DOJ must produce redacted confidentiality agreements to prove assurances | FBI: symbol designations and agency practice show express assurances; declarations suffice | Court: agency practice + declaration establish confidentiality; 7(D) withholding proper |
| Exemption 7(E) (techniques/procedures) & database/search methods | Touarsi: some withheld methods labeled routine so not protected | Agencies: disclosure would reveal triggers, search methods, IT codes, locations of units and risk circumvention | Court: 7(E) justifications adequate; routine document labels do not undermine claims |
| Segregability and "missing" pages | Touarsi: agency failed to show adequate segregability and explain pages sent to CBP | Agencies: declarations state page-by-page review, released segregable material; CBP declaration explains its withholdings | Court: segregability requirement met; CBP explained withheld pages |
| Remedies: expungement and attorney fees | Touarsi: requests expungement of records and fees for delayed searches | Govt: FOIA does not provide expungement remedy; additional releases after suit do not automatically entitle fees | Court: denied expungement and attorney’s fees (plaintiff did not substantially prevail) |
Key Cases Cited
- Am. Civil Liberties Union v. DOJ, 655 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir.) (FOIA disclosure presumption and agency affidavit standards)
- Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973) (Vaughn index requirements)
- CIA v. Sims, 471 U.S. 159 (Supreme Court) (broad protection for intelligence sources and methods)
- Nat’l Archives & Records Admin. v. Favish, 541 U.S. 157 (Supreme Court) (presumption of legitimacy for government conduct and burden to rebut with evidence of misconduct)
- Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press v. DOJ, 489 U.S. 749 (Supreme Court) (analysis of privacy interests under Exemption 7(C))
- Landano v. DOJ, 508 U.S. 165 (Supreme Court) (standard for confidential informant assurances under Exemption 7(D))
- Mayer Brown LLP v. IRS, 562 F.3d 1190 (D.C. Cir.) (standard for 7(E): logical demonstration of risk of circumvention)
- Oglesby v. U.S. Dep’t of the Army, 79 F.3d 1172 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (agency must describe withheld documents sufficiently)
- Klamath Water Users Protective Ass’n v. DOI, 532 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court) (scope of Exemption 5 privileges)