5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
November, 17 2010, 12:09pm EDT
Contact:
Jenn Ettinger, 202-265-1490 x 35
Free Press Files Amicus Brief in Supreme Court Case on Corporate Personhood
Corporations Cannot Claim 'Personal Privacy' Privileges Under the Freedom of Information Act
WASHINGTON
Yesterday, Free Press filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court)
brief in FCC v. AT&T, Inc., which will be heard by the Supreme Court
on Jan. 19, 2011.
The case asks the Court to decide whether corporations may claim
"personal privacy" rights when trying to prevent mandatory disclosure of
documents under the Freedom of Information Act. FOIA requires that the
government release agency records to anyone who requests them, unless
those documents fall under one of several exemptions.
Before the FCC and in the Court of Appeals, AT&T argued that the
Federal Communications Commission should not disclose records of an FCC
enforcement proceeding because AT&T has a personal privacy interest
in protecting its corporate reputation under FOIA Exemption 7(C). This
exemption states that law enforcement records need not be disclosed if
their release "could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy." The Third Circuit Court of Appeals
agreed with this interpretation, and the FCC petitioned for and was
granted certiorari in the Supreme Court.
Aparna Sridhar, Free Press policy counsel, made the following statement:
"A 'corporate personal privacy' right is simply an oxymoron. In this
case, AT&T seeks to extend a deeply held individual right to the
artificial corporate form. We have always recognized our privacy rights
to be grounded in notions of fundamental human dignity and autonomy, and
we should not deploy these rights as mere tools to promote corporate
goals.
"There is a significant cost to withholding enforcement records from
public disclosure that is mandated by the law. The public has a right to
know when large corporations are violating the laws that govern their
business practices, and what the FCC is doing to enforce those laws and
protect the public. Granting AT&T a personal privacy right would
dramatically undermine much needed transparency on both of these fronts.
"The Court should take the opportunity to restore the privacy rights
embodied in FOIA as a shield for vulnerable individuals rather than a
sword for large corporations."
The docket number for the case is 09-1279. A link to the brief is here: https://www.freepress.net/resource/free-press-amicus-brief-supreme-court-...
Free Press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. We believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse and independent ownership of media platforms, and journalism that holds leaders accountable and tells people what's actually happening in their communities.
(202) 265-1490LATEST NEWS
Netanyahu Threatens 'Ground Component' in Iran as Poll Shows Just 7% in US Would Support Invasion
"Trump doesn't need Israel's permission to end this war," said one observer. "The longer he waits, the more Americans pay."
Mar 20, 2026
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday that "there has to be a ground component" to the war on Iran as a new survey of US voters showed just 7% support for a large-scale invasion involving American forces.
"It is often said that you can't win, you can't do revolutions from the air. That is true," Netanyahu told reporters during a press conference in Jerusalem. "You can do a lot of things from the air... but there has to be a ground component, as well. There are many possibilities for this ground component. And I take the liberty of not sharing with you all of those possibilities."
Netanyahu's insistence on the necessity of ground operations in Iran came as US President Donald Trump declared to reporters in the White House on Thursday, "I'm not putting troops anywhere."
"If I were," he added, "I certainly wouldn't tell you."
A Reuters/Ipsos poll released Thursday found that just 7% of US voters support the idea of a large-scale ground invasion of Iran—but 65% of Americans believe that Trump will order such an operation anyway.
Just 34% of US voters would support "deploying a small number of special forces troops" to Iran, the survey found, while 55% said they would oppose the use of any ground troops.
The survey came days after Reuters reported that the Trump administration is "considering deploying thousands of US troops to reinforce its operation in the Middle East, as the US military prepares for possible next steps in its campaign against Iran."
The Pentagon's push for $200 billion in supplemental funding from the US Congress, which did not authorize the Iran war, amplified concerns that the Trump administration is gearing up for a prolonged conflict that could involve American troops on the ground, despite Trump's repeated public insistence that the war will be over "very soon."
Both US and Israeli intelligence agencies have reportedly assessed that Iran's regime is not on the verge of collapse after nearly three weeks of relentless bombing.
"Western officials and analysts who study Iran said they see little near-term prospect of a 'regime change' end to the 47-year-old Islamic republic or the rise of a more democratic government," The Washington Post reported earlier this week. "The latter is a goal cited by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and sometimes by President Donald Trump, who has said he’ll know the war is over 'when I feel it in my bones.'"
Raed Jarrar, advocacy director at the pro-democracy group DAWN, said Thursday that "the United States and Israel are not fighting the same war," pointing to recent Israeli strikes on Iranian energy infrastructure. The strikes drew a public rebuke from Trump, who is facing soaring gas prices at home due to the illegal war he launched in partnership with Netanyahu.
"Trump wants a quick exit. Netanyahu wants to permanently destroy Iran as a regional power," said Shakir. "There is an exit. Trump doesn't need Israel's permission to end this war. He's done it before in Yemen. The longer he waits, the more Americans pay."
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, warned Thursday that Trump may be running out of time to "convincingly declare victory and provide himself a face-saving exit."
"Israel will do all it can to sabotage any such off-ramp, including killing Iranian's negotiators," Parsi wrote. "But it will become increasingly clear—if it hasn't already—to Trump that all his escalatory options only deepen the lose-lose situation he has put himself in."
"That's why Trump should never have listened to Netanyahu in the first place," he added.
Keep Reading
Show Less
'People Can't Afford Healthcare': Sanders Rips Pentagon Request for Another $200 Billion
"People can't afford childcare," said Sen. Bernie Sanders. "And this guy, in addition to giving tax breaks to billionaires, now wants to spend another $200 billion on a war that should never have been fought."
Mar 20, 2026
US Sen. Bernie Sanders said Thursday that it is absurd for the Trump administration to demand another $200 billion from Congress for an illegal war on Iran after lawmakers already approved $1 trillion in military spending for the year—and while millions of people across the nation are struggling to afford basic necessities.
"You got people all over this country, 20% of households, spending 50% of their income on housing," Sanders (I-Vt.) said in an appearance on MS NOW. "People can't afford healthcare. People can't afford childcare. And this guy, in addition to giving tax breaks to billionaires, now wants to spend another $200 billion on a war that should never have been fought."
The senator's remarks came as President Donald Trump, who has not yet formally requested the funds from Congress, suggested another $200 billion would be a "small price to pay" as the US-Israeli war on Iran heads toward its fourth week with no end in sight.
"I think the Trump people are in a bit of panic," Sanders said Thursday. "They're losing ground. Gas prices are soaring. There is massive discontent against this war. It's got to end, and we've got to make sure that Trump is neutered in 2026."
With the Trump administration considering a plan to deploy thousands of additional troops to the Middle East amid widespread fears of a ground invasion of Iran—which would explode the price tag of an already costly war—the National Priorities Project (NPP) released an analysis highlighting where the $200 billion requested by the Pentagon could be better spent.
The group estimated that $200 billion would be enough for all of the following this year:
- Medicaid for the 17 million people who will lose it due to budget cuts and other policies;
- Food stamps for the 22 million people who will go hungry due to Trump's budget cuts;
- Medical care for the 1.8 million veterans of the last forever war who still live with disabilities; and
- Tripling the number of kids in Head Start, from just over 700,000 to 1.4 million kids.
"Pete Hegseth would rather the US bomb Iranian families than feed American families," wrote NPP's Lindsay Koshgarian, referring to the Pentagon secretary. "We should remember the lies that led us into war in Iraq a generation ago. That war ultimately cost nearly $3 trillion. We must not go down that path again. Our tax dollars should be helping struggling Americans, not feeding new forever wars."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Not Another Penny for Another Endless War,' Ilhan Omar Says as Trump Seeks $200 Billion
One advocacy group leader highlighted that "$200 billion is enough to materially change the lives of Americans," from establishing universal pre-K education to building over 100,000 housing units.
Mar 19, 2026
As US President Donald Trump on Thursday confirmed reporting that he's seeking $200 billion more from Congress to continue waging his unpopular war of choice on Iran, Rep. Ilhan Omar was among those forcefully pushing back.
"We're told there's no money for universal healthcare or to end hunger in this country. But somehow $200 billion more for war will likely move through Congress without question," said the progressive Minnesota Democrat, who fled civil war in Somalia as a child. "Not another penny for another endless war."
Since Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu started bombing Iran late last month—creating a spiraling crisis that has now killed and injured thousands of people across the Middle East, plus damaged civilian infrastructure in multiple countries—anti-war lawmakers and organizations have delivered similar messages.
"While they kick 17 million Americans off their healthcare, Republicans want to spend billions on Trump's reckless war of choice," Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said in early March. "Hell no."
Last week, shortly after Pentagon officials told Congress that just the first six days cost Americans more than $11.3 billion, over 250 groups collectively told lawmakers on Capitol Hill to "vote against any additional funding for Trump's unconstitutional war."
At the time, the reported figure was a quarter of what it is now: $50 billion. The coalition noted that the funding "would be enough to restore food assistance for 4 million Americans that was taken away in the tax and budget reconciliation bill, establish universal pre-K education, and pay for the annual construction of more than 100,000 units of housing, among other possible priorities."
After Trump confirmed that he wants four times more than expected, one coalition member, the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) Policy Project, took to social media to highlight other ways the money could be spent to improve the lives of working Americans, from school meals and paid leave to funding all levels of education.
Another coalition member, Public Citizen, released a Thursday statement in which co-president Robert Weissman ripped Trump's spending request as "grotesque beyond words."
According to Weissman:
It should properly be understood not just as a request to replenish supplies, but to expand, escalate, and perpetuate the illegal, unconstitutional, unpopular and devastating war on Iran. Congress should understand that approving any portion of this funding opens the gates for one, two, and potentially many more war funding requests in the future.
How dare the administration propose this gargantuan sum to expand an illegal war of choice at the same time it has rammed through deep cuts in healthcare and food assistance, refuses to spend foreign assistance at a cost of millions of lives, and has cut spending on protecting clean air, maintaining our national parks, investing in health research, protecting consumers from fraud, and so much more.
$200 billion is enough to materially change the lives of Americans and truly make our country stronger. It would be enough to restore food assistance to the 4 million Americans and Medicaid to the 15 million Americans who will lose those crucial supports under the Republican reconciliation bill; establish universal pre-K education; pay for the annual construction of more than 100,000 units of housing; double the budget of the Environmental Protection Agency; and expand Medicare to cover dental, vision, and hearing.
Weissman argued that "every member of Congress should announce, right now, that they will reject this monstrous war funding proposal, before it is formalized."
Despite rising casualties across the Middle East and polls showing that the US assault on Iran is unpopular, even with Trump voters, a few Democrats voted with nearly all Republicans in the Senate and House of Representatives earlier this month to reject war powers resolutions intended to end Trump's Operation Epic Fury. The upper chamber blocked a similar effort late Wednesday.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Most Popular