You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.
FOIA NOT DOA: District Court Holds Federal Reserve Improperly Withheld Records From Bloomberg
August 24, 2009 will undoubtedly go down as a day of celebration at Zero Hedge as the thus-far bullet proof Federal Reserve was ordered to produce documents improperly withheld from Bloomberg reporters Mark Pittman and Craig Torres.
The dispute occurred when both reporters requested information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), about the Federal Reserve’s efforts taken in early 2008 during the nation’s financial crisis. Rather than fully comply with the FOIA requests, and produce the relevant documents, including Term Reports regarding extensions of credit, the Federal Reserve did not provide documents from the Federal Reserve of New York (FRBNY), taking the position that those records were not subject to FOIA requests made to the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve also argued that even if the records were considered records of the Federal Reserve, they were exempt under the FOIA, from being produced. Bloomberg did not serve an FOIA request on the FRBNY. Bloomberg filed a Complaint to compel production of various documents and to force the Federal Reserve to search and produce records at the FRBNY.
Although both sides basically focused on the semantics over whether the records at FRBNY qualified as records of the Federal Reserve, the Court concluded that this disagreement did not need to be resolved. Regardless of location, as long as records were kept in the Federal Reserve’s official files, then it is a record that is subject to an FOIA request.
Moreover, the Court rightfully pointed out that the Federal Reserve improperly withheld records by conducting an inadequate search, and compelled the Federal Reserve to search for records based on Bloomberg’s FOIA requests.
Finally, the Court determined that exemptions under the FOIA did not apply because the Federal Reserve failed to meet its burden of showing that the Term Reports contained privileged or confidential information, were from a person, or that this would cause substantial competitive harm to Federal Reserve borrowers. Interestingly, the Court determined that the Federal Reserve weakened its own argument because the Term Reports were put together by FRB staff. Other than the Borrowers’ names, no other information was obtained in a manner that would fall under an exemption. As such, the Court has compelled the Federal Reserve to produce this information.
Unfortunately Zero Hedge readers, this is not a straightforward slam dunk under the FOIA. Both Bloomberg and the Federal Reserve are to review the results of the Federal Reserve’s search for documents at the FRNBY, and follow up with the Court by September 14, 2009. We can certainly expect additional delay on part of the Federal Reserve, or perhaps more motion practice to hinder Bloomberg’s efforts to obtain records from their FOIA request. For example, once this search is completed, it is possible there will be additional internal discussions at the Federal Reserve as to whether or not exemptions under the FOIA apply to the documents that were “found” at the FRBNY. The struggle with the Federal Reserve to obtain all documents relevant to the Bloomberg requests located at the FRNBY will continue. Stay tuned to Zero Hedge.
This is like the 70's in more than 1 way. Remember the Pentagon Papers and how those smashed the integrity of the military. It's like Déja Vu all over again.
Has anyone tried to apply the FOIA to the Fed's meeting minutes that they get to bury for five years?
It will be a cold day in Arizona when they do anything to this jewish organization known as the FED. The only way this pestilence will be removed from our country is by war and revolution. No people who have ever been oppressed have ever talked their way out of their oppression. None.
The FED doesn't need the Jew bashing to take it down. That's just stupid talk. It more like white WASP Harvard/Yale bottomfeeders to blame. Geithner is Dartmouth, the party IVY. Bernanke is Harvard where he was taught econ 101 by a 19-year TA with no T or A.
Pay NO attention to the man behind the curtain....
unless you have access to the books directly, the fed will still hide whatever it wants to hide. meaningful secrets will not be divulged, only enough will be divulged to make people feel like they are hearing the whole truth. that way, the markets go up, and the ommitted truth remains hidden.
I'd go short smoke and mirrors as I have the feeling we're about to discover a huge supply of them!
Nothing will come out of this - the American public is in denial and totally inept about their own future. Thanks for following the story though Zerohedge.
So it is incumbant of the Fed to find these said documents. And what if they do not 'find' them? "We agree with courts ruling, and after cursory examination we were not able to find any of the documents Bloomberg was referring to. Thank you, and good day."
My read of the court opinion is that the fed already concedes that those documents exist at the NY Fed.
Actually quite the reverse is possible: delay producing them electronically, but have about 10 school buses pull up outside of Bloomberg packed to the gills with paper, with a few smoking guns stashed as an attachment to a misplaced document attached to something else that looks completely innocuous.
Old school fun!
saytomeyer
gay porn; sleazy linking practices..http://www..
hat tip: borderline unethical
Thanks for keeping us posted on the case. It's an important one.
Here's the Bloomberg link to the story: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a7CC61ZsieV4
If necessary, will this move through the court system as fast as an auto bankruptcy? ;-)
mr. hammer, meet nail's head.
An old tactic used when you know you're on the losing side of an argument (or you simply don't wish to comply and have lots of time and money) is to give a little ground after each loss because each "concession" uncovers new (or additional) legal arguments. In fact, you plan your concessions with this practice in mind from the very beginning.
As that beer commercial so wonderfully says "Brilliant!"
Only if GS is in the list.