Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

United States Department Of Justice Et Al. v. Reporters Committee For Freedom Of The Press Et Al.

• 1988 • 489 U.S. 749 • Rehnquist Court
In the case of United States Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 1988, the Supreme Court ruled that under exemption 7(C) in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), an individual's right to privacy outweighs public interest when it comes to disclosing criminal records held by federal agencies. The Reporters Committee and CBS had requested access to a 'rap sheet' compiled by FBI about four members involved in organized crime who were connected with a Pennsylvania...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Rehnquist Court
Term: 1988
Docket: 87-1379
489 U.S. 749
109 S. Ct. 1468
103 L. Ed. 2d 774
1989 U.S. LEXIS 1574
Argued: Dec 07, 1988

United States Department Of Justice Et Al. v. Reporters Committee For Freedom Of The Press Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of United States Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 1988, the Supreme Court ruled that under exemption 7(C) in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), an individual's right to privacy outweighs public interest when it comes to disclosing criminal records held by federal agencies. The Reporters Committee and CBS had requested access to a 'rap sheet' compiled by FBI about four members involved in organized crime who were connected with a Pennsylvania company holding defense contracts. The court concluded that such disclosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy as there was no significant public interest served by revealing this information since it did not shed light on any agency’s performance or activities.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for United States Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, Justice Blackmun argued that the majority's decision was too narrow in its interpretation of privacy rights under FOIA exemptions. He contended that this ruling could potentially undermine transparency and accountability within government agencies by allowing them to withhold information from public scrutiny based on an overly broad definition of personal privacy. Furthermore, he expressed concern over how this decision might impact journalists' ability to access vital information necessary for investigative reporting, thereby hindering their role as watchdogs holding government accountable to the public. In essence, his dissent emphasized a need for balance between individual privacy rights and societal interest in open governance.

Opinion written by Justice JPStevens
Decided: Mar 22, 1989
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcript
Argued: Oct 05, 2026
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms