The Metropolitan Police Department maintains a watchlist of department critics whose requests for information are subjected to heightened scrutiny, a Washington, D.C., defense attorney alleged in a Wednesday lawsuit.
The lawsuit, filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Amy Phillips on Wednesday, argues the department set aside Freedom of Information Act requests from certain people to undergo “special review by high-ranking officials.” She argues the agency violated her First Amendment rights and seeks nominal damages in the amount of $1, as well as the end of the unofficial watchlist policy and an award of attorneys’ fees and costs.
“People are put on this list when they publicly criticize MPD or when they request information that has the potential to embarrass MPD or its officers,” the lawsuit states.
DC DAYCARE WORKERS TO RECEIVE $10,000 CHECKS
Once on the list, those seeking information are more likely to face hurdles the general public can bypass, such as charges for certain documents that others get for free, delayed information requests, or outright rejections, the filing alleges.
Phillips, who claims to be on the list herself, said she was informed of the unofficial watchlist policy in 2020 by Vendette Parker, a former inspector at the MPD. Parker, who assumed the role of FOIA officer in October 2017, said she was advised on how to handle such requests by then-Chief Operating Officer Leeann Turner.
At the time, then-Chief Peter Newsham felt he was “being blindsided” by media requests for records he was “unaware had been released,” the lawsuit states. As a result, Parker was instructed to notify both Turner and Newsham whenever she received FOIA requests “from news reporters or people known to be critical of the department, or those containing requests for information with the potential to embarrass the department.”
“Although Ms. Turner did not name any specific individual in this meeting, she made it clear that I should bring to her attention any request coming from a person he has previously published a negative media article about Chief Newsham or MPD [or] if he uses the records for litigation,” Parker wrote in a signed declaration. “Or if he repeatedly requests records that have the potential to be detrimental to Chief Newsham or MPD, regardless of whether or not what is currently being requested is potentially detrimental.”
As part of the policy, Parker said she was instructed to send weekly emails to Turner and Newsham highlighting requests “with the potential to embarrass Newsham or the department.”
Overall, Parker estimates that between October 2017 and the end of 2019, the MPD “delayed, denied, or improperly altered approximately 20 requests pursuant to the watchlist policy,” according to the lawsuit.
One instance occurred in early 2019, when the ACLU allegedly requested all records of stop-and-frisks conducted in the district over a certain period of time amid a nationwide debate over whether officers conducted these searches without reasonable suspicion.
However, the MPD concluded the request had the potential to embarrass the department, as it could reveal improper conduct or failure to comply with record-keeping requirements, the lawsuit alleged.
As a result, Turner instructed the FOIA staff, including Parker, to “frustrate the ACLU’s attempt to get these records.” Turner, who requested “a very large amount of money” for the records, then suggested a compromise so the ACLU wouldn’t have to pay the sticker price: The department would produce a random selection of documents so the nonprofit organization could decide whether to continue with its request.
Parker noted the MPD did eventually produce the data the ACLU requested, but only after significant delays caused by the price negotiations.
Another incident occurred when requests for information regarding arrests for marijuana possession were submitted. After the FOIA staff gathered the data, Turner discovered a disproportionate number of arrests in black-dominated neighborhoods, after which he instructed the staff to withhold the data until additional information could be gathered to “argue that the disproportionate arrests were due to disproportionate requests rather than discrimination” that resulted in a delay to the report, according to the lawsuit.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Phillip’s suit isn’t the first legal action against the city’s compliance with information requests. A FOIA officer with the city’s Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs filed a similar lawsuit in 2018, alleging the agency interfered with public records requests. That suit was settled in 2020.
“While we haven’t been formally served with the suit, MPD will not discuss specific allegations due to the pending litigation,” the MPD said in a statement to the Washington Examiner. “We do acknowledge the serious nature of the claims. Transparency with our community partners is necessary to maintaining trust and agency accountability. A thorough review of the assertions will be completed and appropriately acted upon.”
