No Privacy Right For Corporations, High Court Says

Corporations cannot shield documents against public disclosure by claiming a “personal privacy” right, according to the U.S. Supreme Court. AT&T had sued the FCC to prevent the it from releasing internal AT&T documents in response to a Freedom of Information Act Request from AT&T competitors.

The FCC had obtained the documents from AT&T during an investigation of AT&T overcharging the government for services to schools and libraries. All documents held by federal agencies are subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) unless they fall under certain exemptions. AT&T had successfully blocked some disclosures under the exception for “trade secrets and commercial or financial information,” but AT&T additionally claimed that some documents would “constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy” of the corporation.

In rejecting AT&T’s argument, Chief Justice John Roberts said that even though the term “person” includes corporations, that does not necessarily mean that “personal privacy” includes privacy of corporations. He noted many cases where related nouns and adjectives have widely differing meanings, such as “corn” and “corny,” and “crank” and “cranky.” He also pointed out that, in common usage, people say “personal” to mean the opposite of “business,” such as when talking about “personal expenses” and “business expenses.”

“Certainly,” Roberts wrote, “if the chief executive officer of a corporation approached the chief financial officer and said, ‘I have something personal to tell you,’ we would not assume the CEO was about to discuss company business.”

AT&T has not said what the documents contain, but at oral argument in January AT&T’s lawyer gave an example of the kind of document that would not be protected by the “trade secret” exception. He said emails between corporate officers disparaging customers could only be protected under a “personal privacy” exception.

The 12-page opinion (short by Supreme Court standards) was written by Chief Justice John Roberts for a unanimous court, excepting Justice Elena Kagan, who worked on the case while Solicitor General. The case was FCC v. AT&T.

About Jay Goodman Tamboli

View all posts by Jay Goodman Tamboli

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Tuesday, October 6

● Report examines big business tax havens

● BP oil spill settlement soars past $20 billion

● Bankruptcy filings lag behind 2014 pace

● Slow housing market is drag on economy

● Credit repair scammers cough up $7.9 million

● Drug maker fined for China bribes

Russia Invades Turkish Airspace, NATO Denounces Actions

Secretary of State John Kerry with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov at the 2013 APEC CEO summit in Bali, Indonesia. Photo: U.S. Department of State

Moscow said that the breach on the Syrian-Turkish border was a mistake, citing bad weather as cause for the incident.

Supreme Court – What Protections Do People Who Guarantee Loans Have?

The Supreme Court, Washington, D.C. (Photo by James Cullum)

The Supreme Court considered how expansive the term “applicant” should be under Federal lending protection laws

The World in 2:00 – October 5, 2015

The World in 2:00

The U.S. finds itself on the receiving end of war crimes allegations after a weekend airstrike on a MSF hospital in Afghanistan.

Supreme Court – Will the Internet Chip Away at Foreign Sovereign Immunity?

The Supreme Court building, Washington, D.C. (Photo by James Cullum)

The high court heard oral arguments on Monday in a case which pits the boarders that divide nations against the Internet that can erase them

White House ‘Welcomes’ Clinton’s Proposal For Executive Action On Gun Control

Josh Earnest

Clinton said she would use executive actions to boost gun control, but Obama has indicated that he has exhausted the tools at his disposal and needs Congress to address gun violence.