Skip to content
Try for free
Back to judgment

Citation network

Department of State Vs. Ray

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Dec 16, 1991

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

31 entries 1 linked 30 unlinked
Show
  1. ins Vs. Cardoza-fonseca US Supreme Court · Mar 09, 1987
  2. U.S. 164 (1991) October Term, 1991 Syllabus United States Department of State V. Ray
    Search
  3. against the ForA's basic policy of opening agency action to the light of public scrutiny. Department of Air Force v. Rose
    Search
  4. See generally INS v. Stevie
    Search
  5. See generally INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca
    Search
  6. Ray v. United
    Search
  7. Department of Justice, 725 F. Supp. 502, 504 (SD Fla. 1989), and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed this finding, Ray v. United
    Search
  8. It therefore ordered the Department to produce the redacted information. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Ray v. United
    Search
  9. to support an Exemption 6 claim is heavier than the standard applicable to Exemption 7(C). See Department of Justice v. Reporters
    Search
  10. within the meaning of the exemption. See Department of State v. Washington
    Search
  11. The Freedom of Information Act was enacted to facilitate public access to Government documents. John Doe Agency v. John
    Search
  12. Department of Air Force v. Rose
    Search
  13. Department of Justice v. Reporters
    Search
  14. unnecessarily compromising individual interests in privacy.lo Accordingly, 9 As we noted in Department of Justice v. Reporters
    Search
  15. These examples guided our analysis in Department of Justice v. Reporters
    Search
  16. of being on the particular list, and the consequences likely to ensue.''' National Assn. of Retired Federal Employees v. Horner
    Search
  17. Comm., 489 U. S., at 773 (quoting Department of Air Force v. Rose
    Search
  18. agency to balance the interest in personal privacy against the public interest in disclosure. Department of Air Force v. Rose
    Search
  19. a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, see, e. g., National Assn. of Retired Fed. Employees v. Horner
    Search
  20. John Doe Agency v. John
    Search
  21. Exemption 6, must be solely upon what the requested information reveals, not upon what it might lead to. Arieff v. United
    Search
  22. result is in accord with the general policy of FOIA, 181 which we referred to in Department of Justice v. Reporters
    Search
  23. not wish to be known about himself-and thus constitutes an invasion of personal privacy. Cf. Department of State v. Washington
    Search
  24. Syllabus United States Department of State V. Ray
    Search
  25. INS v. Stevie
    Search
  26. Exemption 7(C). See Department of Justice v. Reporters
    Search
  27. See Department of State v. Washington
    Search
  28. National Assn. of Retired Federal Employees v. Horner
    Search
  29. National Assn. of Retired Fed. Employees v. Horner
    Search
  30. Arieff v. United
    Search
  31. Cf. Department of State v. Washington
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales