Pecot v. Hill

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that “[u]nder this interpretation, an agency’s ‘internal personnel rules and practices’ appears to mean all its internal rules and practices,” and thus “[t]he modifier ‘personnel’ ... does no modifying work”
• “All we hold today is that Congress has not enacted the FOIA exemption the Government desires. We leave to Congress, as is appropriate, the question whether it should do so.”
• “We have often noted ‘the Act’s goal of broad disclosure’ and insisted that the exemptions be ‘given a narrow compass.’ ”
• “Congress’ decision to use different language to trigger Exemption 7 confirms that the concept of ‘law enforcement purposes’ sweeps in activities beyond [subparagraph (E)’s] investigation and prosecution.”
• FOIA strongly favors openness and “ ‘broad disclosure’ ” with narrowly construed exemptions
• “Those of us who make.use of legislative history believe that clear evidence of congressional intent may illuminate ambiguous text. We will not take the opposite tack of allowing ambiguous legislative history to muddy clear statutory language”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).