Judicial Watch Archives -

Judicial Watch Goes To Court Against The BATFE

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives just can’t seem to keep themselves out of the news this week. The watchdog group Judicial Watch sued BATFE because they still have not responded to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents relating to the attempt to ban 5.56×45 “green-tip” ammunition. The FOIA request was made made in March 2015.

From Judicial Watch on their suit:

Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the agency failed to respond to a March 9, 2015, FOIA request seeking information on the ammo ban effort:

All records of communications, including emails, to or from employees or officials of the ATF related to the decision to revise the ATF 2014 Regulation Guide to no longer exempt 5.56 mm. SS109 and M855 (i.e., “green tip” AR-15) ammunition from the definition of “armor-piercing” ammunition.

The precise statutory definition of “armor-piercing ammunition” can be found in 18 U.S.C §921(a)(17).

“This is yet another example of how Obama’s wanton use of the ‘pen and the phone’ attempted to undermine the constitutional rights of all Americans, as opposed to upholding the rule of law,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Obama ATF simply ignored our request on their ammo ban. Let’s hope the Trump administration finally brings transparency to this out-of-control agency.”

Reading through the complaint, it appears that BATFE just blew off this FOIA request and didn’t even assign it a control number. The complaint asks the District Court to order BATFE to search their records for the requested documents, to order them to hand over all non-exempt documents, and to enjoin them from continuing to withhold any of the requested documents. Judicial Watch is also asking for attorneys’ fees.

Judicial Watch is known for its success in these types of lawsuits. It will make for interesting reading what they uncover.

On Judicial Watch’s Suit Against DOJ For Fast And Furious Documents

This past Friday, Ginny Simone of NRA News interviewed Chris Farrell of Judicial Watch. They are suing the Department of Justice to try and force them to release more documents related to Operation Fast and Furious.

Farrell said that President Obama has personalized this by bringing it into the White House through his claim of executive privilege. He says the only way to resolve this is to bring it before a judge through a lawsuit. He says that Judicial Watch is using the courts to force the issue.

From Judicial Watch’s press release:

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:12-cv-01510)) against the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) seeking access to Operation Fast and Furious records withheld from Congress by President Obama under executive privilege on June 20, 2012. Judicial Watch seeks the following records pursuant to a June 22, 2012, FOIA request filed with the Office of Information Policy (OIP), a component of the DOJ:

All records subject to the claim of executive privilege invoked by President Barack Obama on or about June 20, 2012, as referenced in the letter of Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole to the Honorable Darrell E. Issa, Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the U.S. House of Representatives, dated June 20, 2012. More specifically, the records requested herein are those records described by Deputy Attorney General Cole in his June 20, 2012 letter as “the relevant post-February, 2011, documents” over which “the President has asserted executive privilege.”

The lawsuit was filed yesterday, on September 12, 2012.

On August 6, 2012, OIP informed Judicial Watch that the Offices of the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General had determined that the documents responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request should be withheld in full pursuant to FOIA Exemption 5 which protects “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency.” Judicial Watch appealed the determination. By law, a response was due September 11, 2012. However, as of the date of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit, the DOJ had failed to respond.