Cameranesi v. United States Department of Defense

Good Law
839 F.3d 751·2016 WL 5827478·2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 17714
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 30, 201614-16432California25,911 words

Opinion

Opinion

IKUTA, J.

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

THERESA CAMERANESI; JUDITH No. 14-16432

LITEKY,

Plaintiffs-Appellees, D.C. No. 4:12-cv-00595-PJH v.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF OPINION

DEFENSE; U.S. ARMY TRAINING

AND DOCTRINE COMMAND,

Defendants-Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Phyllis J. Hamilton, Chief Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted May 13, 2016 San Francisco, California

Filed September 30, 2016

Before: Andrew J. Kleinfeld, Sandra S. Ikuta, and Paul J. Watford, Circuit Judges.

Opinion by Judge Ikuta; Dissent by Judge Watford CAMERANESI V. U.S. DEP’T OF DEFENSE

SUMMARY*

Freedom of Information Act

The panel reversed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs, who brought an action under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) against the United States Department of Defense seeking the names of foreign students and instructors at the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation.

The panel held that the disclosure of the names of the foreign students and instructors would constitute a clearly…

Lead Opinion

Ikuta, J.

Dissent by Judge WATFORD

OPINION

This case requires us to determine whether the names of foreign students and instructors at the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHIN-SEC) are exempt from disclosure under Exemption 6 of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(6). Because we conclude that the disclosure of these names “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy,” id., we reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the plaintiffs.

I

We begin with the factual background regarding the development of WHINSEC, the Department of Defense’s adjustments to its disclosure policy in light of the terrorist attacks of. 2001, and the plaintiffs’ lawsuit.

A

The United States Army School of the Americas (SOA) opened in 1946 “for the purpose of providing military education and training to military personnel of Central and South American countries and Caribbean countries.” 10 U.S.C. § 4415 (b) (1987). In 1989, during the Salvadoran Civil War, Salvadoran soldiers gunned down six Jesuit priests as well as their housekeeper and her 16-year-old daughter. It was. later reported that 19 of the 26 soldiers implicated in…

Dissenting Opinion

Watford, J.

dissenting:

The Department of Defense has shown that the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation’s foreign students and instructors have a non-trivial privacy interest in keeping their identities secret. Disclosing their names to the public would reveal their affiliation with the Institute, which might expose them to the risk of harassment or violence when they return to their home countries. But the question remains under Exemption 6 of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) whether that invasion of privacy would be “clearly unwarranted.” 5 U.S.C. § 562 (b)(6). To answer that question, we must balance the privacy interests at stake against the public interest in disclosure protected by FOIA—namely, “the citizens’ right to be informed about Svhat their government is up to,”’ which encompasses “[ojfficial information that sheds light on an agency’s performance of its statutory duties.” De *771 partment of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 773 , 109 S.Ct. 1468 , 103 L.Ed.2d 774 (1989). In my view, on the thin evidentiary record presented here, the Department of Defense did not carry its burden of demonstrating that the students’ and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.