The Department of Homeland Security is stonewalling the public with a string of FOIA requests, claiming they have no records to share on sensitive topics.
In recent months, Freedom of the Press Foundation's Daniel Ellsberg Chair on Government Secrecy, Lauren Harper, has submitted four FOIA requests to DHS in rapid succession. Each request asked for records likely to exist, and any single "no records" response would have been suspicious. But four in a row is enough to cast doubt on DHS' record-keeping practices and its compliance with the Freedom of Information Act.
The first request was about emails sent or received by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem containing the terms "CNN" and "ICEBlock". The second request asked for all body camera footage from ICE captured as part of Operation Midway Blitz in Chicago.
The third request sought records on the Trump administration's plans to raise the water level of an Ohio river to ensure Vice President JD Vance had a nice kayaking trip. And the fourth request was about emails sent or received by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem containing the terms "CNN" and "ICEBlock". The agency responded to each request, claiming they didn't have any records to share.
But questions linger on why DHS would respond in such a manner. Was it just a case of bureaucratic overcautiousness, or is there something more sinister at play?
FOIA compliance has been an ongoing problem within the US government for decades, and many agencies have struggled with it. In recent years, however, the Trump administration has taken full advantage of its ability to avoid releasing records under FOIA.
As a result, the public remains in the dark about many important topics, including the activities of immigration enforcement agencies and their interactions with other government entities.
If DHS really has no records on these requests, then the problem isn't just FOIA compliance – it's governance. A federal agency that can't show its work can't be held accountable, and this lack of transparency erodes trust in government institutions.
In short, the Trump administration is taking advantage of a system designed to promote transparency and accountability. This is not good for democracy.
In recent months, Freedom of the Press Foundation's Daniel Ellsberg Chair on Government Secrecy, Lauren Harper, has submitted four FOIA requests to DHS in rapid succession. Each request asked for records likely to exist, and any single "no records" response would have been suspicious. But four in a row is enough to cast doubt on DHS' record-keeping practices and its compliance with the Freedom of Information Act.
The first request was about emails sent or received by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem containing the terms "CNN" and "ICEBlock". The second request asked for all body camera footage from ICE captured as part of Operation Midway Blitz in Chicago.
The third request sought records on the Trump administration's plans to raise the water level of an Ohio river to ensure Vice President JD Vance had a nice kayaking trip. And the fourth request was about emails sent or received by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem containing the terms "CNN" and "ICEBlock". The agency responded to each request, claiming they didn't have any records to share.
But questions linger on why DHS would respond in such a manner. Was it just a case of bureaucratic overcautiousness, or is there something more sinister at play?
FOIA compliance has been an ongoing problem within the US government for decades, and many agencies have struggled with it. In recent years, however, the Trump administration has taken full advantage of its ability to avoid releasing records under FOIA.
As a result, the public remains in the dark about many important topics, including the activities of immigration enforcement agencies and their interactions with other government entities.
If DHS really has no records on these requests, then the problem isn't just FOIA compliance – it's governance. A federal agency that can't show its work can't be held accountable, and this lack of transparency erodes trust in government institutions.
In short, the Trump administration is taking advantage of a system designed to promote transparency and accountability. This is not good for democracy.