Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Judge rules EPA "LIED" about transparency...
d2d
Member Posts: 3,109
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy confers with an aide as "she" prepares to address the Natural Resources Committee session during the National Governors Association Winter Meeting in Washington, Sunday, Feb. 22, 2015. (AP Photo/Cliff Owen)
A federal judge warned the Environmental Protection Agency on Monday not to discriminate against conservative groups in how it responds to open-records requests, issuing a legal spanking. Judge Royce C. Lamberth concluded the agency may have lied to the court and showed “apathy and carelessness” in carrying out the law, though the judge was unable to determine if documents were intentionally destroyed.
Judge Lamberth described the “absurdity” of the way the EPA handled a Freedom of Information Act request from the Landmark Legal Foundation and then the court case stemming from it — including late last week admitting it lied to the court about how it went about searching for documents. In a scorching 25-page opinion, the judge accused the agency of “insulting” him by first claiming it had done a full search for records, then years later retracting that claim without any explanation.
“The recurrent instances of disregard that EPA employees display for FOIA obligations should not be tolerated by the agency,” the judge said in a 25-page ruling. “This court would implore the executive branch to take greater responsibility in ensuring that all EPA FOIA requests — regardless of the political affiliation of the requester — are treated with equal respect and conscientiousness.”
I'm shocked.
Comments
I'm the source from the Order of the Court.
Judge blasts EPA for ‘suspicious’ handling of conservative group’s FOIA: Washington Post
A federal judge Monday blasted the Environmental Protection Agency for its “suspicious” handling of a 2012 Freedom of Information Act request by a conservative group for top officials’ e-mails, saying the agency left “far too much room” for the public to suspect official misconduct.
U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth said that while he would not impose sanctions because the Landmark Legal Foundation had not established that the EPA acted in bad faith, the agency either intentionally sought to evade the FOIA request in order to destroy documents or demonstrated extreme apathy and carelessness.
“Either scenario reflects poorly upon EPA and surely serves to diminish the public’s trust,” wrote Lamberth, former chief judge of the federal court of the District. In a 25-page opinion, Lamberth called EPA’s recurring disregard of public information disclosure obligations “offensively unapologetic” but “more consistent with ineptitude.”
He added, “This Court would implore the Executive Branch to take greater responsibility in ensuring that all EPA FOIA requests — regardless of the political affiliation of the requester — are treated with equal respect and conscientiousness.”
The foundation, a conservative public interest law firm led by Mark R. Levin, a talk radio host and former chief of staff to Reagan attorney general Edwin Meese III, requested EPA documents in August 2012 seeking to learn whether top agency officials were systematically delaying enacting rules until after that fall’s presidential elections.
Then-EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson announced her resignation that December but not until after congressional Republicans and watchdog groups hammered agency leaders for using pseudonymous or private e-mail accounts to conduct official business. Jackson used an EPA account under the name “Richard Windsor,” for instance, apparently derived from the names of her dog and her home town.
Lamberth said the foundation failed to uncover evidence that EPA postponed rules. Still, he wrote, EPA perceived Landmark “as an enemy,” and FOIA officers and top aides to Jackson and her deputy, Robert Perciasepe, did not search their accounts until after the election, then did so cursorily until facing a court-ordered deadline. The agency apparently never searched for e-mails of EPA’s chief of staff.
Similarly, EPA did not initially search the administrator or deputy’s personal e-mail accounts or BlackBerry devices and erased Jackson’s BlackBerry after her February 2013 departure.
The ruling “confirmed what we have been saying for two years — that the EPA obstructed, delayed and destroyed public information about its regulatory activities,” Levin said. “This is basic information the public should have about rule-making and potential influences on that rule-making.”