CREW says the government's rule against discovery conflicts with FOIA's text
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in WashingtonPlaintiff in the FOIA lawsuit, in its Supreme Court brief in opposition
In its brief opposing review, CREW argued that public facts showed USDS wielding independent authority and that the government's proposed bar on discovery cannot be squared with FOIA's text.
Responding to
The U.S. DOGE Service is not an agency subject to FOIA because it is a body in the Executive Office of the President whose role is to advise the President.
“Undisputed facts in the public record—including the President’s statements—confirmed that USDS was wielding enormous independent authority across the federal government. ... The government’s proposed rule is impossible to square with statutory text, and it would be ripe for abuse.”
Original text
Where this statement fits
Supreme Court agrees to review court-ordered discovery into whether DOGE is subject to FOIA
CREW sued in February 2025 to make the U.S. DOGE Service process its public-records request under the Freedom of Information Act. The Justice Department argues that USDS is a presidential advisory body outside FOIA and that court-ordered discovery into its authority intrudes on the separation of powers. CREW argues that USDS exercised substantial independent authority and that limited discovery is needed to decide whether FOIA applies. On October 13, 2026, the Supreme Court agreed to review the appeals court order that let most of that discovery proceed.
Source and context
Original text
About this source
CREW asked the Court to deny review. It argues that the D.C. Circuit followed the Court's 2025 instructions, that the remaining discovery is limited, and that the government's proposed rule against such discovery conflicts with FOIA's text.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
CREW describes the executive orders that created USDS and the district court's preliminary finding that USDS likely wields substantial independent authority.
After the quotation
CREW also argues that the case is a poor vehicle because the mandamus standard requires the government to show it is clearly right, and that other cases have already produced discovery about USDS.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The reference point is the Justice Department's position that the U.S. DOGE Service, as a body that advises the President, should not face court-ordered discovery into whether FOIA applies to it. Label: Condemned. CREW rejects that position, calling the government's proposed rule impossible to square with the statute and open to abuse. The closest competing label is Challenged characterization; it loses because CREW does more than dispute the advisory label: it argues against the rule that would shield USDS from discovery.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseDonald K. Sherman calls the government's petition a delay tactic
“This appeal is an obvious delay tactic to keep the American public in the dark about DOGE’s reckless operation and disastrous impact. The lower courts have categorically ruled that CREW is entitled to discovery, and rather than accept those rulings and provide the Court and the public with long overdue transparency, DOGE is trying to dodge disclosure for as long as possible.”Read statement
Justice Department says discovery into an advisory body defeats FOIA's exclusion
United States Department of Justice
“Subjecting advisory bodies to intrusive discovery triggers the very concerns that Congress sought to avoid by excluding presidential advisory bodies from FOIA’s reach.”Read statement
American Oversight says the Supreme Court is shielding DOGE from scrutiny
American Oversight
“President Trump continues to use the Supreme Court as a shield — protecting DOGE from accountability and hindering the public’s right to know ... The Court didn’t dispute that DOGE may be violating transparency laws — it merely objected to how the lower court was trying to uncover the truth.”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- CREW says the government's rule against discovery conflicts with FOIA's text
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/5671-in-its-brief-opposing-review-crew-argued-that
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "CREW says the government's rule against discovery conflicts with FOIA's text". First published: 2026-10-14. Last updated: 2026-10-14. https://disputeindex.com/events/5671-in-its-brief-opposing-review-crew-argued-that