en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency_v._Sims
2 corrections found
The plaintiffs were John Cary Sims and Sidney M. Wolfe, an attorney and director of Public Citizen respectively.
Sidney M. Wolfe was not the director of Public Citizen as a whole. In the case itself, the Supreme Court identified him as the director of the Public Citizen Health Research Group.
Full reasoning
This sentence misidentifies Sidney M. Wolfe's role. In CIA v. Sims, the Supreme Court states: "John C. Sims, an attorney, and Sidney M. Wolfe, M.D., the director of the Public Citizen Health Research Group" filed the FOIA request. Public Citizen's own materials likewise describe Wolfe as the founder/leader of its Health Research Group, not as the overall director of Public Citizen.
So the article's description of Wolfe as simply the "director of Public Citizen" is inaccurate and overstates his position within the organization.
2 sources
- Remembering Dr. Sidney M. Wolfe - Public Citizen
Dr. Sidney Wolfe founded the Health Research Group in 1971 with Ralph Nader, part of the enterprise that launched as Public Citizen that same year.
- CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY v. SIMS, 471 U.S. 159 (1985) | LII / Legal Information Institute
On August 22, 1977, John C. Sims, an attorney, and Sidney M. Wolfe, M.D., the director of the Public Citizen Health Research Group, filed a request with the Central Intelligence Agency seeking certain information about MKULTRA.
The third exemption specified in the Act authorizes the refusal to disclose information that is classified subject to a relevant statutory basis.
This sentence confuses FOIA Exemption 3 with Exemption 1. Exemption 3 covers records that another federal statute specifically exempts from disclosure; classified information is covered by Exemption 1.
Full reasoning
This is a legal misstatement of the Freedom of Information Act.
FOIA Exemption 3 does not cover information because it is classified. Instead, Exemption 3 applies when another federal statute specifically exempts the information from disclosure. The Supreme Court's syllabus in CIA v. Sims describes Exemption 3 that way, and both the FOIA statute and DOJ guidance say the same.
By contrast, classified national-security information is covered by Exemption 1, which applies to matters "specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order" and "properly classified" under that order.
So saying the "third exemption" covers information that is "classified" is incorrect; that description belongs to Exemption 1, not Exemption 3.
3 sources
- 5 U.S. Code § 552 - Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings
(b) This section does not apply to matters that are— (1) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order ... and are in fact properly classified ...; ... (3) specifically exempted from disclosure by statute.
- Criminal Division | General Information
One provision of the FOIA, known as Exemption 3, provides for the withholding of records when disclosure is prohibited by another federal law.
- CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY v. SIMS, 471 U.S. 159 (1985) | LII / Legal Information Institute
Citing Exemption 3 of the FOIA-which provides that an agency need not disclose "matters that are . . . specifically exempted from disclosure by statute"-the CIA declined to disclose the requested information.