New York Times Company v. Central Intelligence Agency

314 F. Supp. 3d 519 (2018)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

New York Times Company v. Central Intelligence Agency

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
314 F. Supp. 3d 519 (2018)

Facts

In July 2017, the Washington Post published an article reporting that President Donald Trump had ended a covert program run by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) (defendant) to arm and train Syrian rebels. A few days later, Trump posted a tweet—a message on the social-media service Twitter—stating that the “Washington Post fabricated the facts on my ending massive, dangerous, and wasteful payments to Syrian rebels fighting Assad.” A day later, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Trump made a rambling statement in response to a question about whether he was disappointed with the Justice Department and attorney general. Trump said, “they should go after the leakers in intelligence.” Trump also seemed to reference the Washington Post article, indicating that “they didn’t write the truthful story, which they never do,” that a decision had been made by “people, not me,” and that whatever the Washington Post had reported “was not something that I was involved in.” Thereafter, the New York Times Company (the Times) (plaintiff) submitted a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to the CIA, seeking records related to the program that Trump had tweeted about. The CIA did not respond. The Times sued the CIA to obtain the documents. The CIA then issued a response stating that it could neither confirm nor deny the existence or nonexistence of responsive records because, pursuant to FOIA’s exemption 1, the existence or nonexistence of records was a classified matter—i.e., a Glomar response. The parties moved for summary judgment, supported by affidavits. Evidence supported that any substantive response to the FOIA request would be considered classified due to the matter’s nature and sensitivity. The Times argued that Trump’s statements had declassified and officially acknowledged the existence of a covert CIA program and thus the records were no longer exempt from disclosure.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Carter Jr., J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 735,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 735,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 735,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership