Judge throws out DOE 'still interested' FOIA

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson on August 5 vacated the Energy Department’s “Still Interested Inquiry,” a policy that would have required many FOIA requesters to re-confirm they still wanted records before the agency would keep processing their requests. The policy applied to requests submitted before October 1, 2024, and gave requesters 30 days to respond or face administrative closure. Jackson wrote that FOIA “does not authorize defendants to issue a blanket requirement that all requesters reiterate their interest in pending requests,” according to the opinion described by Federal News Network. (federalnewsnetwork.com) (americanoversight.org) The case matters because DOE was trying to use a backlog-clearing tool on a department-wide basis rather than in individual cases. American Oversight, the nonprofit that sued, said the ruling blocks an attempt to close thousands of pending requests by shifting the burden back onto the public. Jackson vacated the policy under the Administrative Procedure Act, according to American Oversight’s account of the decision. ### Which DOE policy did the judge strike down? DOE announced the policy in an August 14, 2025 Federal Register notice. The notice said DOE headquarters was trying to “increase efficiency” and reduce its FOIA backlog, and it applied to requests filed before fiscal 2025, meaning before October 1, 2024. (federalnewsnetwork.com) Requesters had to email the agency within 30 days if they wanted their requests to remain open. Federal News Network reported that DOE said it could close requests if no response came back. The department had said the step was needed to help clear its backlog and handle newer requests, and it said incoming FOIA requests had tripled over the previous four years. (americanoversight.org) DOE also blamed an influx of cases from “vexatious requesters and automated bots,” according to the report. ### Why did the court say DOE could not do that? Jackson’s ruling turned on authority, not on whether “still interested” letters can ever be used in any circumstance. (federalregister.gov) In the opinion described by Federal News Network, she said FOIA does not let an agency impose a blanket rule requiring all requesters with pending matters to take affirmative steps to restate their interest. She added that the statute’s text suggests the opposite because FOIA directs agencies to make non-exempt records promptly available. The Justice Department’s Office of Information Policy was part of that analysis. (federalnewsnetwork.com) Federal News Network said Jackson pointed to OIP guidance advising agencies to make only “limited” use of still-interested letters and to process the vast majority of requests to completion. That distinction left room for targeted follow-ups in particular cases while rejecting DOE’s across-the-board approach. ### Who brought the case, and what did they argue? American Oversight filed suit in September 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. (federalnewsnetwork.com) The group argued that DOE had exceeded its authority under FOIA, violated the Administrative Procedure Act, and created a risk that valid requests would be closed without a lawful basis. It also said some requesters might never get effective notice, especially if they had not submitted requests by email. Chioma Chukwu, American Oversight’s executive director, said after the ruling that the decision was “a victory for transparency, accountability, and the public’s right to know.” She said DOE’s policy, if allowed to stand, could have become a model for other agencies to evade FOIA obligations by putting extra burdens on requesters. (federalnewsnetwork.com) ### Does the ruling ban all “still interested” letters? The August 5 order, as described in the available reports, rejected DOE’s blanket notice rather than declaring every use of a still-interested inquiry unlawful. (americanoversight.org) Jackson’s opinion relied in part on OIP guidance that contemplates limited use of such letters, not mass deployment to all older pending requests. That leaves agencies with less room to use backlog-management devices that are not clearly grounded in FOIA. American Oversight said the court also rejected DOE’s attempt to avoid review after the litigation began, holding that the dispute remained live even after the agency said it would continue processing the plaintiff’s requests. (federalnewsnetwork.com) ### What happens next for DOE and FOIA requesters? The immediate next step is that DOE’s August 2025 blanket notice is vacated. Federal News Network and American Oversight both said the ruling leaves the department without that across-the-board reconfirmation policy for older pending requests. (federalnewsnetwork.com) The underlying FOIA requests remain with DOE, and any appeal or further court filing would proceed through the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia docket in the American Oversight case. American Oversight said the challenged policy covered requests submitted before October 1, 2024, and those requests are the ones now unaffected by the blanket 30-day reconfirmation requirement. (americanoversight.org) (federalnewsnetwork.com)