Open Society Justice Initiative v. Trump

Background

The Government requested a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(e) concerning Exhibit 3 to the complaint. The exhibit contained the name and email address of a low-level employee of the Office of Foreign Assets Control. The Government asked to replace the publicly available version with one that redacted that employee’s name and email address.

Request and Positions

The Government argued that judicial records generally carry a presumption of public access, but that courts may allow narrowly tailored redactions for good cause. It maintained that the employee’s identifying information had little connection to the public interest and that the employee had privacy interests in preventing disclosure of the employee’s name. The Government described the employee as a Sanctions Licensing Officer in a working-level, non-managerial position in the Licensing Division of the Office of Foreign Assets Control.

The plaintiffs did not object to the requested relief, while reserving their rights regarding whether redaction is appropriate in this or any other circumstance. The plaintiff Open Society Justice Initiative also redacted the same information in the version of Exhibit 3 posted on its website.

Ruling

The court’s endorsement states, “Application GRANTED.” The Clerk of Court was directed to replace Exhibit 3 with the version attached to the endorsement. The order therefore granted the Government’s request for the limited redaction. It did not resolve the underlying claims in the lawsuit.