In Muslim Advocates v. United States Department of Justice, (D DC, Nov. 10, 2011), the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia held that the federal government can rely on the exemption in the Freedom of Information Act for certain law enforcement records to deny an advocacy group unredacted copies of chapters of the FBI's Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide. The court upheld in part the government's release of only a redacted version of the Guide. However, the court called for additional explanation of the government's insistence on extensive redactions in one of the chapters.
The 2009 complaint (full text) in the case contended that plaintiffs sought the documents because of their relevance to concerns over racial and religious profiling and concerns about infringement of privacy and various 1st Amendment rights. In 2008, prior to implementing the Guide, the FBI had held two meetings with civil rights and civil liberties organizations to discuss the Guide. The attendees were allowed to review unredacted versions of 4 chapters, and take notes on them, for about two hours. Plaintiffs claimed that this waived the government's right to now withhold these chapters under FOIA exemptions. The court held, however, that it "is not convinced that such a limited review is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the public-domain doctrine in the absence of evidence that the disputed chapters are now 'truly public'." Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press reports on the decision.
