American Civil Liberties Union v. Department of Defense
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
339 F. Supp. 2d 501 (2004)

- Written by Laura Julien, JD
Facts
On October 7, 2003, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) (plaintiff) filed a request with the Department of Defense (DOD) (defendant) pursuant to the federal Freedom of Information Act. Specifically, the ACLU requested from the DOD certain information regarding detainees in the United States’ custody. The DOD did not respond to the ACLU’s request, did not assert any exemptions, and did not produce any documents. On July 2, 2004, the ACLU filed suit against the DOD in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The district court judge ordered that the DOD respond to the ACLU’s Freedom of Information Act request and either produce the requested documents or provide a log identifying each document that was withheld along with a specific claim for each exemption. The DOD responded and only provided a small number of documents. The DOD also requested that the district court allow it to respond to the remainder of the ACLU’s request on a rolling basis. Specifically, the DOD sought permission to have another year to review the documents because many of the documents were classified and had to be reviewed and redacted line by line. The DOD also asserted that it could not confirm or deny the existence of some documents because of national-security concerns.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hellerstein, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.