The Department of Defense is seeking a new statutory exemption to the Freedom of Information Act to withhold unclassified military tactics, despite existing laws already allowing the protection of properly classified national security information. This request follows a Supreme Court clarification that narrowed the scope of an exemption previously cited for internal human resources matters. The DoD argues this narrowing restricts its ability to protect sensitive operational data, though critics contend the agency is misinterpreting the ruling and simply wishes to expand its capacity for secrecy without adding new substantive risks. Open government advocates argue that the proposed exemption is unnecessary and dangerous, as it would create a broad loophole for concealing operational details that are not inherently classified. The primary concern is that such expanded opacity could be exploited to shield embarrassing or controversial internal practices, including handling of sexual assault complaints, prisoner treatment, and contractor oversight, under the guise of national security. By allowing the DoD to withhold unclassified tactics, the legislation would prioritize institutional invisibility over public accountability, undermining the transparency principles that FOIA is designed to uphold. This issue is highly relevant to open data and transparency advocates because it highlights the persistent tension between government secrecy and public access to information. The attempt to weaken FOIA exemptions demonstrates how large institutions may manipulate legal frameworks to avoid disclosing data, even when no genuine security threat exists. It serves as a cautionary tale for the open data movement, illustrating that legislative protections are not static; they require constant vigilance to prevent the erosion of transparency norms in favor of administrative convenience or misconduct concealment.
Source: techdirt.comPublished on 2023-05-15