Marshals Service denied the request, citing Exemption 7(C). In 2013, after four Michigan police officers were arrested for bribery and drug conspiracy, the Detroit Free Press requested the officers’ mug shots pursuant to FOIA. The privacy interest recognized in Free Press II thus calls into doubt the conventional wisdom that the “right to be forgotten” is out of step with U.S. 11 These comparisons focused more on online embarrassment than on the disclosure of private or personal facts. 10 To reach this conclusion, the Sixth Circuit compared mug shots to rap sheets and death-scene images. United States Department of Justice ( Free Press II), 8 the Sixth Circuit reversed course and held that “ndividuals enjoy a non-trivial privacy interest in their booking photos” even after appearing in open court, 9 and that booking photos may be exempt from disclosure under Exemption 7(C) on a case-by-case basis. FOIA’s Exemption 7(C) allows agencies to withhold disclosure of “information compiled for law enforcement purposes” 5 when producing such records “could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” 6 In 1996, the Sixth Circuit held that “no privacy rights are implicated” by agency disclosure of mug shots once a defendant has appeared in court. 2 Since its passage in 1966, the Freedom of Information Act 3 (FOIA) has offered professional reporters and amateur sleuths a powerful tool to investigate “what their government is up to.” 4 But FOIA came with an exception to prevent private citizens from harnessing the power of the federal government to investigate one another. Journalists with easy access to photographs have been accused of “invad the sacred precincts of private and domestic life” 1 since the phrase “right to privacy” first entered the legal lexicon.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |