Cases

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ ) THE JAMES MADISON PROJECT, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Case No. 17-cv-00597 (APM) ) UNITED STATE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA THE JAMES MADISON PROJECT, et al, ) Plaintiffs, Vv. Case No. 1:16-cv-227-RCL U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et al., Defendants. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs James Madison Project and Ken Dilanian filed two Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) requests with defendants U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”) in 2015. Defendants believe that they have met their FOIA obligations and thus request that

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ ) JAMES MADISON PROJECT, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Case No. 17-cv-00597 (APM) ) UNITED STATE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) JAMES MADISON PROJECT, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 17-1392 (ABJ) ) DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ ) JAMES MADISON PROJECT, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Case No. 17-cv-00144 (APM) ) DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) THE JAMES MADISON PROJECT and ) KEN DILANIAN, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) v. ) Civil Action No. 1

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROSEMARY M. COLLYER, United States District Judge Plaintiff James Madison Project (JMP) brought this action pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, appealing the disposition of records it requested from, among other agencies, the Department of Defense (DoD). On September 22, 2016, the Court granted in part an

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROSEMARY M. COLLYER, United States District Judge The James Madison Project challenges the adequacy of the responses to its FOIA requests that were sent to the Department of Justice and various constituent agencies of DOJ, the Department of Defense and various constituent agencies of DoD, and the Central Intelligence Agency. The James Madison Project also requests leave to amend its Com

AMY BERMAN JACKSON, United States District Judge Plaintiffs Josh Gerstein, a journalist, and The James Madison Project, an organization established "to promote government accountability," Compl. [Dkt. # 1] ¶ 3, brought this suit against the Department of Justice ("DOJ"), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"), under the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"),

Amit P. Mehta, United States District Judge Once more, this court is called upon to opine on the legal consequences of President Donald J. Trump's declassification of information concerning the "Dossier"-the 35-page compilation of memoranda prepared by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele concerning Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and alleged ties between Russia and then candidate Trump.

Amit P. Mehta, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION The now infamous "Trump Dossier" is a collection of memoranda prepared by former British intelligence operative Christopher Steele during the 2016 presidential election concerning then-candidate Donald J. Trump. As has been reported extensively in the media, the 35-page Dossier contains, among other things, allegations that the government o

MEMORANDUM OPINION AMY BERMAN JACKSON, United States District Judge This case- arises out of a Freedom of Information Act request by plaintiffs Shane Harris,- a reporter for the publication The Daily Beast, and the James Madison Project, seeking records “pertaining to the revelations, that former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private attorney, David Kendall, had retained personal control, ov

I. BACKGROUNDThe undisputed facts relevant to the defendants' motion are the following. See generally Pls.' Facts (not disputing any the defendants' facts). On December 10, 2015, the plaintiffs submitted a FOIA request to the Director, see Defs.' Facts ¶ 27, seeking "copies of all [of the Director's] records pertaining to [Thomas Andrews] Drake from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2011," id. ¶ 28.

AMY BERMAN JACKSON, United States District Judge The James Madison Project, an organization concerned with promoting government accountability and reducing secrecy, and Noah Shachtman and Spencer Ackerman, an editor and reporter for the Daily Beast, have brought this suit against the Department of State, the Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA"), the Department of Defense (on behalf of the National Security Agency ("NSA") and Defense

605 F.Supp.2d 99 (2009) The JAMES MADISON PROJECT, Plaintiff, v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, Defendant. Civil Action No. 07-1154 (RMU). United States District Court, District of Columbia. March 19, 2009. *104 Mark S. Zaid, Bradley P. Moss, Mark S. Zaid, P.C., Washington, DC, for Plaintiff. James C. Luh, Vesper Mei, U.S. D

607 F.Supp.2d 109 (2009) The JAMES MADISON PROJECT, Plaintiff, v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, Defendant. Civil Action No. 07-1382 (RMU). United States District Court, District of Columbia. March 26, 2009. *115 Mark S. Zaid, Bradley P. Moss, Mark S. Zaid, PC, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff. James C. Luh, Vesper Mei, U.S. De

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) THE JAMES MADISON ) PROJECT, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 19-2461 (ABJ) ) DEPARTMENT OF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JAMES MADISON PROJECT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 1:22-cv-00674 (TNM) OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Congress enacted the Freedom of Information Act in 1966, heeding the old adage

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) JAMES MADISON PROJECT, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 17-1231 (ABJ) ) CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE ) AG

Dismissing as moot the challenge to Executive Order No. 13,780, decision by published per curiam order. Judge Niemeyer concurred in part and dissented in part from the order dismissing as moot, in which Judge Shedd and Judge Agee joined. ORDER PER CURIAM: The Supreme Court held, by order dated October 10, .2017, that the appeal of ou