Supreme Court Says AT&T Not Exempt From FOIA
- By David Kravets
- March 1, 2011 |
- 4:59 pm |
- Categories: politics, privacy
The court, with Justice Elena Kagan recused, said AT&T did not enjoy the “personal privacy” provision of the Freedom of Information Act as the telecom had claimed. The act exempts the government from publicly disclosing law enforcement records if they “constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”
The case concerns trade group CompTel’s FOIA request in 2005 for records AT&T forwarded to the FCC’s enforcement bureau concerning AT&T’s admitted overpricing of telecom equipment and services to Connecticut schools under the graft-ridden E-Rate program.
The FCC, against AT&T’s objections, said the records could be released to the public because the company has no “personal privacy.” AT&T took the case to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said corporations were, indeed, “persons” subject to protection from public disclosure.
“Corporations, like human beings, face public embarrassment, harassment and stigma,” the appeals court had ruled. The FCC appealed to the Supreme Court, which overturned the circuit court Tuesday.
“This is not to say that corporations do not have correspondence, influence, or tragedies of their own, only that we do not use the word ‘personal’ to describe them,” (.pdf) Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.
The Obama administration urged the high court to reject AT&T’s claim of personhood, as did several advocacy groups. They contended that, if the lower court’s decision stood, corporations could escape public oversight.
It was not immediately known when the records at the center of the case would become public.
Here is the complete record of the case.
Photo: (m)factr/Flickr
See Also:
- Feds: Privacy Does Not Exist in ‘Public Places’
- Foursquare Puts Money Before Privacy
- Supreme Court Takes ‘Informational Privacy’ Case
- Privacy in Peril: Lawyers, Nations Clamor for Google Wi-Fi Data
- Groups Call ‘Privacy’ Legislation Orwellian
- Supreme Court Rules Against ‘First-Sale’ Copyright Doctrine
- All Rise: Supreme Court’s Geekiest Generation Begins
The Shining review Paths of Glory review Lawrence of Arabia review Double Indemnity review The Pianist review
No comments:
Post a Comment