United States: The Supreme Court Streamlines FOIA Exemption 4

The Supreme Court has addressed the test under which companies may seek to prevent disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) of business records submitted to the government that contain trade secrets or confidential commercial or financial information. In Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media, dba Argus Leader,1 the Court unanimously2 overturned a 45-year old D.C. Circuit precedent that required submitting companies to demonstrate that disclosure would be likely to cause them substantial competitive harm.

After Argus, "confidential" in the context of Exemption 4 means only that the information was "customarily and actually treated as private by its owner, and provided to the government under an assurance of privacy."3 No proof of harm to either the submitter or the government's ability to obtain similar information need be offered. The Court was clear that, in order to be protected, the information must at least be treated as private. The Court left open, however, whether Exemption 4 also requires that privately held information must be submitted to the government with an assurance of confidentiality.

Context: FOIA Exemption 4 Before Argus

FOIA provides that all federal agency records are accessible to the public unless specifically exempt from disclosure, and permits the public a broad right to request information from federal agencies.4 Recognizing that some information must legitimately be kept confidential, FOIA includes nine exemptions, covering personal information, internal government deliberations, and other categories.5 Exemption 4 requires agencies to withhold from release any documents containing "trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential."6

Exemption 4 is of critical importance to companies that submit proprietary and confidential information to agencies, as it is the primary mechanism by which companies submitting such information can prevent public release in response to a FOIA request. Recognizing the importance of the need for companies to protect sensitive information from public release, Executive Order 12,600 requires agencies to give submitters notice and an opportunity to object prior to releasing information that may be covered by Exemption 4.7 If the agency disagrees with an assertion of protection, it must give the submitter sufficient notice to allow the submitter to go to court and seek an injunction by filing a so-called "reverse FOIA" suit, on the theory that the agency decision to release information protected by FOIA Exemption 4 is actionable under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).8

While there are several elements relevant to qualifying for Exemption 4 protection, the most challenging has often been demonstrating that the information at issue qualifies as "confidential." In National Parks & Conservation Association v. Morton, the D.C. Circuit held that information submitted to the government is confidential only "if disclosure of the information is likely to have either of the following effects: (1) to impair the Government's ability to obtain necessary information in the future; or (2) to cause substantial harm to competitive position of the person from whom the information was obtained."9 In Critical Mass Energy Project v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the D.C. Circuit later stated that the "substantial harm" requirement applied only to mandatory submissions, and held that submissions made on a voluntary basis must be withheld if the submitter "customarily" did not release such information to the public.10 This created the so-called "Critical Mass distinction" between voluntary and mandatory submissions. In practice, considerable disputes arose over whether certain submissions (and categories of submission) were voluntary or involuntary, as submitters sought to avoid the more onerous National Parks test of likely substantial competitive harm. The Supreme Court's Argus decision sweeps away the National Parks test.

Argus: The Supreme Court Kills National Parks

In Argus, the Supreme Court rejected as inconsistent with the plain language of Exemption 4 the National Parks requirement to demonstrate likely substantial competitive harm. The Court gave no deference to the D.C. Circuit's prior reliance on legislative history, contemporaneous Congressional debate transcripts, and similar documents, dismissing such reliance as "a relic from a bygone era of statutory construction."11 The Court instead searched for, and did not find, any concern for competitive harm in the text of FOIA, and so rejected the addition of this implied requirement.

Argus arose in the context of a FOIA request to the USDA seeking information about participants in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). USDA declined to release store-level SNAP data, invoking FOIA Exemption 4. Argus sued USDA, seeking disclosure of the withheld data. Applying the National Parks test, which was controlling law in the district in which the lawsuit was brought, the district court held a bench trial to determine whether disclosure of the store-level SNAP data would cause substantial competitive harm to participating retailers, concluded that no such substantial harm would occur, and ordered disclosure. The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed.12 The Supreme Court granted certiorari to consider whether FOIA Exemption 4 requires a showing of substantial competitive harm.

The Court, in a decision authored by Justice Gorsuch, reversed the 8th Circuit's decision. Justice Gorsuch first analyzed the plain language of Exemption 4 and the dictionary definition of the term "confidential" existing at the time FOIA was enacted in 1966, concluding: "The term 'confidential' meant then, as it does now, 'private' or 'secret'".13 The decision identifies two circumstances under which information might qualify as confidential: First, "information communicated to another remains confidential whenever it is customarily kept private, or at least closely held, by the person imparting it," and second, "information might be considered confidential if the party receiving it provides some assurance that it will remain secret."

Justice Gorsuch explained that the first of these conditions must be met to qualify for Exemption 4 protection, as "it is hard to see how information could be deemed confidential if its owner shares it freely."14 There was no dispute that this first condition was satisfied in the case at issue; the information withheld was not disclosed or made publicly available.

Justice Gorsuch declined to answer the second question of: "Can privately held information lose its confidential character for purposes of Exemption 4 if it's communicated to the government without assurances that the government will keep in private?"15 Again, there was no dispute in the case at hand that the retailers at issue had received assurances of confidentiality for the store-level SNAP information.16

Implications And A Critical Open Question

The Argus holding will likely manifest itself over time, with the true implications to be revealed through additional litigation. At a minimum, the National Parks standard is obsolete. In order to fall within the Exemption 4, it is critical that the information to be protected actually is kept private. This was always the law, and it is still important for companies to maintain information control procedures (and document the existence and implementation of those procedures).

In light of this renewed focus on demonstrating confidential treatment, companies submitting information to an agency should, at a minimum, carefully and clearly mark any confidential information as such, invoking where possible any agency regulations or guidance expressing a policy to withhold release of confidential commercial information. This has always been a best practice, and retains enhanced significance now.

Argus leaves open the question of whether information kept privately may be protected under Exemption 4 if it is submitted to the government without an assurance of confidentiality. We expect it will take some time for lower courts to come to any sort of consensus on this issue.

  1. See Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media, DBA Argus Leader, No. 18-481 (S. Ct. June 24, 2019).
  2. A partial dissent was filed by Justices Breyer, Ginsberg, and Sotomayor, but the dissenting justices agreed with the majority's rejection of the National Parks "substantial competitive harm" standard. (Argus, No 18-481, Dissent at *2-3.)
  3. Argus, No 18-481 at *12.
  4. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a).
  5. Id. § 552(b).
  6. Id. § 552(b)(4). While the language of Exemption 4 is permissive, courts have found that Exemption 4 is at least coextensive to the Trade Secrets Act, and thus "a finding that requested material falls within Exemption 4 will be tantamount to a determination that the agency cannot reveal it." CNA Fin. Corp . v. Donovan, 830 F.2d 1132, 1144 (D.C. Cir. 1987).
  7. Exec. Order No. 12,600, 52 Fed. Reg. 23,781 (June 23, 2987).
  8. See e.g., Canadian Corp. v. Dep't of Air Force, 514 F.3d 37, 39 (D.C. Cir. 2008); Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 441 U.S. 281 (1979).
  9. 498 F.2d 765, 770 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
  10. 975 F.2d 871, 884-85 (D.C. Cir. 1992).
  11. Argus, No 18-481 at *8.
  12. Id. at *1-4.
  13. Id. at *5.
  14. Id. at *6.
  15. Id.
  16. Id.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions