Washington, D.C. (July 18, 2019) – U.S. District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson yesterday denied the Internal Revenue Service’s (“IRS”) motion to dismiss Cause of Action Institute’s (“CoA Institute”) Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) lawsuit over the agency’s refusal to produce records relating to its dealings with Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation (“JCT”). To date, the IRS has refused to search for records potentially responsive to CoA Institute’s FOIA requests. The agency instead has argued that all relevant records would categorically be “congressional records” outside the scope of disclosure permitted under the FOIA. In its failed motion, the IRS claimed that the federal district court even lacked the authority—or subject-matter jurisdiction—to adjudicate CoA Institute’s well-pleaded claims in the first instance.
Archives for 2019
Settlement in Federal Trade Commission v. D-Link Systems Includes No Finding of Liability
WASHINGTON D.C. – Today, Cause of Action Institute (CoA Institute) announced the resolution its client, D-Link Systems, Inc., has reached with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regarding the FTC’s allegations about the security practices D-Link Systems used for its products. D-Link Systems is an industry leader in Internet of Things (IoT) and networking solutions.
Supreme Court Expands FOIA Exemption 4, Cramping Government Oversight and Marring Text
Washington, D.C. (June 24, 2019) – Cause of Action Institute (CoA Institute) today released the following statement regarding the Supreme Court’s decision in FMI v. Argus Leader, a case considering the scope of Exemption 4 under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which will impact all FOIA requesters including news media, individuals, and government transparency groups:
EXIM Supporter Investigated for Potentially Defrauding the Bank
Cause of Action Institute recently received documents indicating that a repeat customer and vocal supporter of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (“EXIM”) allegedly defrauded the bank. EXIM, which is tasked with assisting the financing of U.S. exports, has gained a reputation for favoring certain companies over others, which is exemplified by its nickname “the Bank of Boeing” for its preferential treatment of the airline. Recent reports from the Government Accountability Office and the EXIM Inspector General (”IG”) have also shown a disconcerting susceptibility to fraud.
Supreme Court Adopts the Position Urged by Cause of Action for When Fabrication-of-Evidence Lawsuits Must Be Filed
The window of time to file any lawsuit is limited. The period usually begins to run when the plaintiff first knows that something went wrong. In special circumstances, however, fair policy requires that the window to sue opens, or as lawyers say, the claim “accrues,” at a different time. Today, in McDonough v. Smith, a case in which Cause of Action Institute filed two briefs, the Supreme Court identified one of those special situations.
Supreme Court Signals Nondelegation Doctrine Has Life
This week, the Supreme Court indicated that it may be on the verge of, for the first time in eight decades, applying the nondelegation doctrine and requiring Congress, not government bureaucrats, to make law. This critical development could result in significant advancement of economic freedom, political accountability, and the liberty of individual citizens.
Commerce Provides Poor Excuse in First Substantive Answer on Secrecy of 232 Auto Tariff Report
Washington, D.C. (June 19, 2019) – After nearly four months, Cause of Action Institute (CoA Institute) has finally received an explanation from the Department of Commerce (Commerce) that claims the Commerce Secretary’s final report to the President regarding the Section 232 investigation into the national security impacts of the Administration’s proposed automobile tariffs may constitute a presidential record. In this determination, which is in response to CoA Institute’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and subsequent litigation, Commerce states it is reviewing whether the report does in fact constitute a presidential record, which would remove it from the scope of the FOIA. It also claims that if the report ultimately is classified as an “agency record,” Commerce will still refuse to provide access to the report under the guise of presidential communications or deliberate process privileges.