Hunt v. Central Intelligence Agency’s Empirical Analysis
981 F.2d 1116 · 1992
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably Wolf v. Central Intelligence Agency (2007), Minier v. Central Intelligence Agency (1996)
15 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 5 U.S.C. § 552 (Freedom of Information Act) · 50 U.S.C. § 403 (§ 102 of the National Security Act of 1947) · 50 U.S.C. § 431 (§ 701 of the National Security Act of 1947)
Relies on Vaughn v. Rosen · Jones v. Nor-Tex Agencies, Inc. · Central Intelligence Agency v. Sims · Phillippi v. Central Intelligence Agency · Gardels v. Central Intelligence Agency
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"the disclosure of the existence or non-existence of documents must not be viewed in isolation but rather as one tile in a mosaic of intelligence gathering. Through the CIA's disclosure of the existence or non-existence of records on particular individuals, a FOIA requester could make the information public or otherwise available to counter-intelligence operations from other nations.... [T]hose experts could then determine the contours and gaps of CIA intelligence operations and make informed judgments as to the identities of probable sources and targets [who] ... could * find themselves under suspicion and in grave danger.... [P]otential future sources would be reluctant to come forward; targets of intelligence scrutiny would be alerted and could take additional precautions; and foreign operatives could learn whether or not the CIA was aware of their activities" ( 981 F.2d at 1119 ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(c) Search and review for information. Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section, exempted operational files shall continue to be subject to search and review for information concerning— (3) the specific subject matter of an investigation by the congressional intelligence committees, the Intelligence Oversight Board, the Department of Justice, the Office of General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency, the Office of Inspector General of the .Central Intelligence Agency, or the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for any impropriety, or violation of law, Executive order, or Presidential directive, in the conduct of an intelligence activity.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“logically falls within the claimed exemptions, and [ ] that the justifications are not controverted by contrary evidence in the record or by evidence of [ ] bad faith.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.