Can the Government Legally Hide Whether MJ 12 Records Exist?

Introduction

A Glomar response can legally hide whether classified records exist at all. Under the US Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), an agency may sometimes answer a request by neither confirming nor denying that it holds responsive records, because even saying “yes” or “no” would itself disclose information protected by a FOIA exemption. That creates a genuine obstacle for anyone trying to investigate an alleged secret programme.[Department of Justice]justice.govDepartment of JusticeOffice of Information Policy | Department of Justice Guide to the Freedom of Information ActMay 28, 2026…Published: May 28, 2026

But this rule has a narrower implication for the alleged MJ-12 documents than is sometimes assumed. Glomar shows why silence from an intelligence agency cannot automatically prove that no secret records exist. It does not mean that every unsuccessful records search should be interpreted as concealed confirmation. In the MJ-12 case, important official findings were not merely refusals to confirm or deny: archivists searched relevant collections, agencies reported what they had found, and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) published conclusions about the alleged documents.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying Objects | National ArchivesJune 25, 2024…Published: June 25, 2024

What a Glomar response actually means

The legal idea takes its name from the Hughes Glomar Explorer, a vessel publicly presented as part of a deep-sea mining enterprise but secretly used by the CIA in Project AZORIAN, an attempt to recover part of a sunken Soviet submarine. The CIA now openly describes that operation and identifies it as the origin of the “neither confirm nor deny” formulation.[CIA]cia.govFlag that Flew Above the Glomar ExplorerFlag that Flew Above the Glomar Explorer - CIA…

Journalist Harriet Ann Phillippi sought CIA records concerning the agency’s reported efforts to discourage press coverage of the Glomar operation. The resulting litigation, Phillippi v. CIA, became the foundational case associated with what came to be called the Glomar response.[Justia Law]law.justia.comJustia LawHarriet Ann Phillippi, Appellant, v. Central Intelligence Agency and George H. Bush, Director,central Intelligence Agency, 546…

The crucial point is that Glomar protects a fact about records, not simply the contents of records. Ordinarily, an agency might acknowledge that it possesses a document but withhold some or all of its contents under a FOIA exemption. With Glomar, the agency argues that it cannot safely reveal even whether the document exists.

That distinction matters. Suppose someone asks an intelligence agency for “all records showing that Agency X conducted operation Y”. Three superficially similar answers carry very different meanings:

The US Department of Justice describes the modern rule in essentially those terms: where acknowledging whether records exist would harm an interest protected by a FOIA exemption, an agency may give a Glomar response. DOJ’s 2026 FOIA reporting guidance confirms that the mechanism remains in current use.[Department of Justice]justice.govunited states department justice 2026 chief foia officer report 0Department of JusticeOffice of Information Policy | United States Department of Justice 2026 Chief FOIA Officer Report…

This is therefore not a coded admission that documents exist. A properly framed Glomar policy has to preserve both possibilities. If an agency used “neither confirm nor deny” only when records actually existed, the response itself would become a reliable signal of existence and would defeat its purpose. DOJ has explicitly discussed this signalling problem in explaining related FOIA mechanisms for exceptionally sensitive law-enforcement and intelligence records.[Department of Justice]justice.govDepartment of JusticeOffice of Information Policy | Implementing FOIA's Statutory Exclusion ProvisionsDecember 6, 2022…Published: December 6, 2022

Why classified programmes can remain unacknowledged

National-security cases show why confirming absence can sometimes be almost as revealing as confirming presence. Intelligence services protect not only individual secrets but patterns: what they investigate, whom they monitor, which technologies they can detect and where their collection capabilities have gaps.

In Willis v. NSA, for example, a court accepted the National Security Agency’s position that confirming or denying whether it possessed intelligence records concerning the requester could reveal classified information about intelligence collection when such requests were considered collectively.[Department of Justice]justice.govwillis v nsa no 17 2038 2019 wl 1924249 ddc apr 30 2019 jackson jDepartment of JusticeOffice of Information Policy | Willis v. NSA, No. 17-2038, 2019 WL 1924249 (D.D.C. Apr. 30, 2019) (Jackson, J.) | Un…

The same logic appeared in litigation involving requested information about surveillance and satellites. In Igoshev v. NSA, the agency argued successfully that acknowledging whether responsive records existed could expose intelligence capabilities, activities and priorities, potentially helping adversaries understand what communications or targets the NSA could detect.[Department of Justice]justice.govigoshev v nsa no 17 1363 2018 wl 2045530 d md may 1 2018 hollander jigoshev v nsa no 17 1363 2018 wl 2045530 d md may 1 2018 hollander j

Courts therefore do not require the government to disclose the very secret that the Glomar response is intended to protect before permitting it to use the doctrine. Instead, national-security cases commonly ask whether the agency has supplied a sufficiently detailed explanation connecting acknowledgement of the records’ existence or absence to a recognised FOIA exemption. Courts frequently describe the required national-security justification as “logical and plausible”.[Department of Justice]justice.govOpen source on justice.gov.

That gives agencies significant room to protect genuinely unacknowledged intelligence activity, but it is not unlimited. A 2022 case concerning FBI records illustrates the boundary particularly clearly. A federal court accepted a Glomar response for operational documents, because acknowledgement could reveal intelligence sources, methods or activities, but rejected the blanket rationale for policy documents, whose mere existence did not necessarily expose the same secrets.[Department of Justice]justice.govOpen source on justice.gov.

A similar distinction appeared in a 2024 case involving intelligence agencies and commercially available information. The court accepted Glomar protection for operational material but held that the request was broad enough to encompass other records for which the agencies had not justified blanket concealment.[Department of Justice]justice.govOpen source on justice.gov.

Glomar, in other words, is not a general legal licence for an agency to make any inconvenient subject disappear.

Public knowledge does not always defeat Glomar

One counter-intuitive feature of the doctrine is that widespread public belief that an operation exists does not necessarily force an agency to acknowledge it.

Newspaper reporting, leaked documents, anonymous officials and statements by private individuals do not automatically amount to an official acknowledgement. Courts have distinguished between something being widely reported and the government officially confirming the precise fact that a FOIA requester wants confirmed. DOJ’s summaries of Glomar litigation record cases in which extensive public discussion was insufficient because the relevant agency had not officially acknowledged the specific connection or records at issue.[Department of Justice]justice.govOpen source on justice.gov.

Yet official disclosure can change the equation. The dispute over CIA records concerning US drone strikes provides a useful example. In 2013 the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected the CIA’s attempt to maintain its complete Glomar position after senior US officials had publicly acknowledged enough about American participation in drone strikes that the agency’s claimed total silence was no longer considered logical or plausible in the form asserted. The court sent the case back for further proceedings rather than simply ordering every requested document released.[Department of Justice]justice.govaclu v cia no 11 5320 2013 wl 1003688 dc cir 2013 garland jaclu v cia no 11 5320 2013 wl 1003688 dc cir 2013 garland j

That last qualification is important. Defeating Glomar does not necessarily defeat classification. Once an agency has to acknowledge that records exist, it may still invoke applicable FOIA exemptions to withhold their contents.

For MJ-12 research, this distinction prevents two opposite errors. Public claims, leaked-looking papers and decades of discussion cannot by themselves force the conclusion that the government possesses authentic MJ-12 files. Equally, a genuine Glomar response concerning a narrowly defined classified subject would not establish that no such files existed. It would leave the existence question deliberately unanswered.

Why the MJ-12 findings are different

This is where the documentary history of MJ-12 becomes more important than the abstract possibility of Glomar.

The National Archives does not simply publish a statement saying that it can neither confirm nor deny whether MJ-12 material exists. Its reference report describes specific searches and their results. Archives staff searched records of the Secretary of Defense, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Headquarters US Air Force and related files without finding further information supporting the supposed MJ-12 project. Searches of National Security Council indexes under terms including “MJ-12”, “Majestic”, “UFO” and related expressions were negative apart from the controversial Cutler-to-Twining memorandum.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying Objects | National ArchivesJune 25, 2024…Published: June 25, 2024

The Archives also records concrete anomalies surrounding that memorandum. The document was found in a series filed by Top Secret register number but lacked such a number; no other documents concerning “NSC/MJ-12” were found in its folder; inquiries to the Air Force, Joint Chiefs and National Security Council produced no further information; and the Eisenhower Library found no corresponding special meeting in the President’s appointment books for 16 July 1954. The Archives further notes that Robert Cutler was away inspecting military installations when the memorandum attributed to him was dated.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying Objects | National ArchivesJune 25, 2024…Published: June 25, 2024

Those are positive statements about archival findings. They are not equivalent to “we refuse to tell you whether we have records”.

The 1995 GAO inquiry makes the distinction still sharper. GAO reported that the Information Security Oversight Office, Air Force and National Archives said their knowledge of Majestic 12 was limited to material supplied by people outside government. It found no evidence that the circulated MJ-12 material consisted of genuine executive-branch documents. GAO also reported that federal archivists had found nothing fitting the description of Majestic 12 or references to it in the collections searched, while the Air Force regarded a separate 1980 message containing the words “MJ Twelve” as a forgery.[Government Accountability Office]gao.govGovernment Accountability Office[Comments on Majestic 12 Material] | U.S. GAOGovernment Accountability Office[Comments on Majestic 12 Material] | U.S. GAO

None of this logically proves that no unidentified compartment, record or activity could ever have existed somewhere outside the collections examined. Historical searches always have limits, and Glomar doctrine demonstrates that US law can sometimes preserve uncertainty about exceptionally sensitive intelligence records.

But it changes what must be explained. The MJ-12 problem cannot accurately be reduced to “the government used Glomar, so nobody knows whether the files exist”. The public record instead contains documented searches, statements about agency holdings, examination of particular alleged documents and reported authenticity problems.

What Glomar can and cannot prove about MJ-12

Glomar is strongest as a warning against an overly simple inference: “FOIA produced nothing, therefore the secret programme never existed.” For genuinely unacknowledged intelligence matters, that reasoning can fail because FOIA law sometimes permits the government to conceal even the existence or absence of records.[Department of Justice]justice.govDepartment of JusticeOffice of Information Policy | Department of Justice Guide to the Freedom of Information ActMay 28, 2026…Published: May 28, 2026

It is much weaker as an argument running in the opposite direction: “FOIA produced nothing, therefore the programme may be hidden behind Glomar.” That possibility requires evidence that the relevant response actually was Glomar-like, or some independent reason to believe that the existence of responsive records was being protected. The mere existence of the doctrine cannot convert every negative search result into evidence for a secret compartment.

That asymmetry is central to evaluating alleged MJ-12 records. Glomar can preserve uncertainty; it cannot authenticate a document. It can explain why a particular intelligence agency might legally decline to settle an existence question; it cannot erase archival anomalies in an alleged memorandum. And it cannot transform affirmative official statements that searches found no corroborating records into “neither confirm nor deny” responses when that is not what the agencies said.

The most defensible conclusion is therefore deliberately narrow. Yes, the US government can in some circumstances legally hide whether classified records exist, so official silence alone is not decisive evidence against an extraordinary secret programme. But the published MJ-12 record goes beyond official silence. The National Archives and GAO documented searches and specific findings that weigh against the authenticity of the alleged MJ-12 material. Glomar doctrine supplies a legitimate reason for caution about arguments from absence; it does not supply positive evidence that MJ-12 existed.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying Objects | National ArchivesJune 25, 2024…Published: June 25, 2024

Amazon book picks

Further Reading

Books and field guides related to Can the Government Legally Hide Whether MJ 12 Records Exist?. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.

Book

The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence

By Victor Marchetti, John D. Marks

First published 1974. Subjects: United States, United States. Central Intelligence Agency, CIA, Inlichtingendiensten, Spionage.

See on Amazon

Book

Top Secret/Majic: Operation Majestic-12 and the United States...

By Stanton T. Friedman

Top Secret/Majic is the result of nuclear physicist and renowned UFO investigator Stanton T. Friedman's twenty-one year search for the tr...

See on Amazon

Book

Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers

By Daniel Ellsberg

Three decades after making history by releasing the Pentagon Papers, the former U.S. Marine and Pentagon insider reveals why he did it an...

See on Amazon

Browse more on Amazon:The CIA and the Cult of IntelligenceTop Secret/Majic: Operation Majestic 12 and the United States Government's UFO Cover UpCan Government biography

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

eBay marketplace picks

Marketplace Samples

Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.

Shop location

UsingUSA USA USAUKCanadaAustraliaIreland

Selected fromUFO poster oneBay.co.uk.

Current eBay listing

UFO S4 Framed Picture Poster Print Wall Art A3 Bob Lazar

GBP 21.50 | Shipping GBP 3.71NewSeller: lavishaddict (100.0% positive)Ships from: GB

View listing on eBay

Current eBay listing

VINTAGE UFO ABDUCTION ILLUSTRATION FRAMED WALL ART PICTURE POSTER PRINT

GBP 11.99 | Free shippingNewSeller: canvas monkey (99.8% positive)Ships from: GB

View listing on eBay

Current eBay listing

I WANT TO BELIEVE X-FILES ALIEN UFO POSTER -FRAMED ART PICTURE PAPER PRINT

GBP 14.99 | Free shippingNewSeller: captivart (99.6% positive)Ships from: GB

View listing on eBay

Current eBay listing

FS02 VINTAGE UFO FLYING SAUCERS COMIC ADVERTISING A4 POSTER PRINT

GBP 4.71 | Free shippingNewSeller: andys-prints-uk (99.6% positive)Ships from: GB

View listing on eBay

Browse more oneBay.co.uk

Example items shown for inspiration; availability and pricing can change. Branchoria may earn a commission if you purchase through outbound eBay links.

Endnotes

1. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/doj-guide-freedom-information-act-0

Published: May 28, 2026

2. Source: justice.gov
Title: united states department justice 2026 chief foia officer report 0
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/united-states-department-justice-2026-chief-foia-officer-report-0

3. Source: archives.gov
Title: National Archives Project BLUE BOOK
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/military/air-force/ufos

Published: June 25, 2024

4. Source: gao.gov
Title: Government Accountability Office[Comments on Majestic 12 Material] | U.S. GAO
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/154832

5. Source: cia.gov
Title: Flag that Flew Above the Glomar Explorer
Link:https://www.cia.gov/legacy/museum/artifact/flag-that-flew-above-the-glomar-explorer/

6. Source: cia.gov
Title: Cold War Spy Crane Aids Disaster Recovery Today
Link:https://www.cia.gov/stories/story/cold-war-spy-crane-aids-disaster-recovery-today/

7. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/546/1009/204926/

8. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/blog/implementing-foias-statutory-exclusion-provisions

Published: December 6, 2022

9. Source: justice.gov
Title: willis v nsa no 17 2038 2019 wl 1924249 ddc apr 30 2019 jackson j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/willis-v-nsa-no-17-2038-2019-wl-1924249-ddc-apr-30-2019-jackson-j

10. Source: justice.gov
Title: igoshev v nsa no 17 1363 2018 wl 2045530 d md may 1 2018 hollander j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/igoshev-v-nsa-no-17-1363-2018-wl-2045530-d-md-may-1-2018-hollander-j

11. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/mosier-v-cia-no-213-cv-00744-mce-kjn-2013-wl-6198197-ed-cal-november-27-2013-england-jr-cj

12. Source: justice.gov
Title: klayman v cia no 14 472 2016 wl 1118253 ddc mar 22 2016 moss j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/klayman-v-cia-no-14-472-2016-wl-1118253-ddc-mar-22-2016-moss-j

13. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/project-priv-surveillance-accountability-inc-v-doj-no-21-2362-2022-wl-4547531-ddc-sept

14. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/project-priv-surveillance-accountability-v-nsa-no-22-1812-2024-wl-68244-ddc-jan

15. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/archive/oip/courtdecisions/exemption1.html

16. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/archive/oip/courtdecisions/official-acknowledgment.html

17. Source: justice.gov
Title: aclu v cia no 11 5320 2013 wl 1003688 dc cir 2013 garland j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/aclu-v-cia-no-11-5320-2013-wl-1003688-dc-cir-2013-garland-j

18. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/mobley-v-cia-nos-11-2072-11-2073-bah-2013-u-s-dist-lexis-16399-ddc-feb-7-2013-howell-j

19. Source: justice.gov
Title: united states department justice 2024 chief foia officer report
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/united-states-department-justice-2024-chief-foia-officer-report

20. Source: archives.gov
Title: ISO O Notices | National Archives
Link:https://www.archives.gov/isoo/notices

21. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2020cv03838/225447/64/

22. Source: archives.gov
Title: Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel | National Archives
Link:https://www.archives.gov/declassification/iscap

23. Source: archives.gov
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/topics/uaps/presidential-libraries

24. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2024cv01940/270230/25/

25. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/2026-chief-foia-officer-report-guidelines-agencies-receiving-100-or-more-requests-fiscal-year

26. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2024cv00076/265155/20/

27. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/22-5303/22-5303-2025-07-18.html

28. Source: justice.gov
Title: united states department justice 2025 chief foia officer report
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/united-states-department-justice-2025-chief-foia-officer-report

29. Source: archives.gov
Title: JF K Assassination Records
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2022?order=Record+Series&page=72&search=&sort=asc

30. Source: archives.gov
Title: JF K Assassination Records
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2017-2018?%3Border=Num&%3Bsort=asc&order=Record+Series&page=548&sort=asc

31. Source: archives.gov
Title: JF K Assassination Records
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2017-2018?order=Record+Num&p=&page=571&sort=desc

32. Source: archives.gov
Title: JF K Assassination Records
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2022?ftag=MSF0951a18&order=From+Name&page=245&sort=asc

33. Source: archives.gov
Title: JF K Assassination Records
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2017-2018?mobile=&order=Record+Num&page=520&sort=asc

34. Source: archives.gov
Title: JF K Assassination Records
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2022?ftag=YHF4eb9d17&order=Formerly+Withheld&page=246&sort=desc

35. Source: archives.gov
Title: JF K Assassination Records
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2022?order=NARA+Release+Date&page=194&s=03&sort=asc

36. Source: archives.gov
Title: JF K Assassination Records
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2022?order=Originator&page=77&sort=desc

37. Source: archives.gov
Title: JF K Assassination Records
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2017-2018?mobile=&order=Comments&page=404&sort=asc&width=320

38. Source: archives.gov
Title: JF K Assassination Records
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2022?order=Record+Series&page=36&search=&sort=desc

39. Source: archives.gov
Title: History of the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) | National Archives
Link:https://www.archives.gov/isoo/about/history.html

40. Source: justice.gov
Title: tran v doj no 18 739 2025 wl 416153 ddc feb 6 2025 moss j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/tran-v-doj-no-18-739-2025-wl-416153-ddc-feb-6-2025-moss-j

41. Source: justice.gov
Title: lenz v cia no 20 3327 2024 wl 4346263 ddc sept 30 2024 lamberth j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/lenz-v-cia-no-20-3327-2024-wl-4346263-ddc-sept-30-2024-lamberth-j

42. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2020cv03327/224130/74/

43. Source: cia.gov
Title: How To Sound Like A Spy: Five Colloquialisms at CIA
Link:https://www.cia.gov/stories/story/how-to-sound-like-a-spy-five-colloquialisms-at-cia/

44. Source: justice.gov
Title: jud watch inc v doj no 22 5209 2023 wl 4397354 dc cir july 7 2023 curiam
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/jud-watch-inc-v-doj-no-22-5209-2023-wl-4397354-dc-cir-july-7-2023-curiam

45. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2021cv00627/228665/30/

46. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/gov-t-accountability-project-v-cia-no-19-449-2022-wl-4598582-ddc-sept-30-2022-moss-j

47. Source: cia.gov
Title: 10 Fascinating CIA Missions
Link:https://www.cia.gov/stories/story/ten-fascinating-cia-missions

48. Source: cia.gov
Title: Honoring the Mission of Project AZORIAN
Link:https://www.cia.gov/stories/story/honoring-the-mission-of-project-azorian/

49. Source: justice.gov
Title: jud watch inc v doj no 21 01216 2022 wl 2828987 ddc july 20 2022 lamberth j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/jud-watch-inc-v-doj-no-21-01216-2022-wl-2828987-ddc-july-20-2022-lamberth-j

50. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2021cv01601/232283/10/

51. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2019cv01991/208958/35/

52. Source: archives.gov
Title: Classified National Security Information (CNSI) Guidance | National Archives
Link:https://www.archives.gov/guidance/classified-info-guidance

53. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/20-5045/20-5045-2021-08-27.html

54. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/open-socy-just-initiative-v-dod-no-20-5096-2021-wl-3038528-sdny-july-15-2021-furman-j

55. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2019cv00778/205405/49/

56. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1%3A2019cv00234/508052/176/

57. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/19-5052/19-5052-2020-10-13.html

58. Source: justice.gov
Title: lindsey v fbi no 16 2032 2020 wl 5593935 ddc sept 18 2020 kollar kotelly j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/lindsey-v-fbi-no-16-2032-2020-wl-5593935-ddc-sept-18-2020-kollar-kotelly-j

59. Source: justice.gov
Title: ny times v cia no 18 2112 2020 wl 3863087 2d cir july 9 2020 walker j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/ny-times-v-cia-no-18-2112-2020-wl-3863087-2d-cir-july-9-2020-walker-j

60. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/18-2112/18-2112-2020-07-09.html

61. Source: cia.gov
Title: The Exposing of Project AZORIAN
Link:https://www.cia.gov/stories/story/the-exposing-of-project-azorian/

62. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2018cv02709/201814/42

63. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2017cv00397/184847/25/

64. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2015cv01431/173710/39/

65. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2017cv02176/190404/23/

66. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/james-madison-project-v-cia-no-17-1231-2018-wl-4623036-ddc-sept-26-2018-jackson-j

67. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2017cv01231/187462/17/

68. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2017cv01392/187927/31

69. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/janangelo-v-treasury-inspector-gen-tax-admin-no-17-15838-2018-wl-2979010-9th-cir-june

70. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2012cv01872/157030/427/

71. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/court-of-appeals/2018/19.html

72. Source: justice.gov
Title: kinney v cia no 17 35384 2018 wl 1443611 9th cir mar 23 2018 curiam
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/kinney-v-cia-no-17-35384-2018-wl-1443611-9th-cir-mar-23-2018-curiam

73. Source: archives.gov
Title: Do Records Show Proof of UFOs? | National Archives
Link:https://www.archives.gov/news/articles/do-records-show-proof-of-ufos

74. Source: archives.gov
Title: ¿Registros muestran prueba de ovnis? | National Archives
Link:https://www.archives.gov/espanol/ovnis

75. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2017cv00414/184887/17/

76. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2017cv00144/183994/36/

77. Source: justice.gov
Title: smith v cia no 15 01431 2017 wl 1194166 ddc mar 30 2017 chutkan j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/smith-v-cia-no-15-01431-2017-wl-1194166-ddc-mar-30-2017-chutkan-j

78. Source: archives.gov
Title: Background on NARA Classified MOUs | National Archives
Link:https://www.archives.gov/declassification/ndc/background.html

79. Source: justice.gov
Title: platsky v nsa no 15 1529 2016 us dist lexis 86171 sdny july 1 2016 carter jr j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/platsky-v-nsa-no-15-1529-2016-us-dist-lexis-86171-sdny-july-1-2016-carter-jr-j

80. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/agility-pub-warehousing-co-ksc-v-nsa-no-14-0946-2015-wl-4183443-ddc-july-10-2015-howell-j

81. Source: archives.gov
Link:https://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2014/nr14-89.html

82. Source: justice.gov
Title: carter v nsa no 12 0968 2013 wl 4505284 ddc aug 26 2013 kollar kotelly j
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/carter-v-nsa-no-12-0968-2013-wl-4505284-ddc-aug-26-2013-kollar-kotelly-j

83. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/12-5137/12-5137-2013-05-21.html

84. Source: docs.justia.com
Link:https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/11-5320/1207476756

85. Source: archives.gov
Link:https://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2012-189

86. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/10-5248/10-5248-1348609-2011-12-20.html

87. Source: docs.justia.com
Link:https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/10-5248/1207340102

88. Source: docs.justia.com
Link:https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2010cv00436/141218/34

89. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2010cv01533/143958/15

90. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/09-5428/09-5428-1315528-2011-06-28.html

91. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2009cv02269/139689/43/

92. Source: docs.justia.com
Link:https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2009cv02269/139689/43

93. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2009cv00746/136344/52/

94. Source: archives.gov
Title: isoo implementing directive
Link:https://www.archives.gov/isoo/policy-documents/isoo-implementing-directive.html

95. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2009cv01363/137669/21/

96. Source: docs.justia.com
Link:https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1%3A2009cv01363/137669/21

97. Source: justice.gov
Title: foia post 2008 summaries new decisions september 2008
Link:https://www.justice.gov/archives/oip/blog/foia-post-2008-summaries-new-decisions-september-2008
Published: september 2008

98. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/05-16820/0516820-2011-02-25.html

99. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/473/370/589051/

100. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/05-5394/05-5394a-2011-03-24.html

101. Source: archives.gov
Title: nr02 13
Link:https://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2002/nr02-13

102. Source: archives.gov
Link:https://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/1999/99-125

103. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/974/946/1451030/

104. Source: gao.gov
Title: nsiad 95 95
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/nsiad

105. Source: gao.gov
Title: nsiad 95 118
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/nsiad

106. Source: gao.gov
Title: nsiad 95 84
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/nsiad

107. Source: gao.gov
Title: nsiad 95 122r
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/nsiad-95-122r

108. Source: gao.gov
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/t-nsiad

109. Source: gao.gov
Title: ggd 95 106
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/ggd

110. Source: gao.gov
Title: osi 95 9
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/osi

111. Source: gao.gov
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/hr

112. Source: gao.gov
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/hr

113. Source: gao.gov
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/hr

114. Source: gao.gov
Title: nsiad 95 46
Link:https://www.gao.gov/products/nsiad

115. Source: cia.gov
Title: U S HAS HISTORY OF TRYING TO KEEP SECRETS OUT OF NEWS | CIA FOIA (foia.cia.gov)
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp90-00965r000807570006-2

116. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/archives/oip/blog/foia-update-oip-guidance-privacy-glomarization

117. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/593/675/2138495/

118. Source: justice.gov
Title: Office of Information Policy | FOIA Update: FOIA Counselor: Questions & Answers
Link:https://www.justice.gov/archives/oip/blog/foia-update-foia-counselor-questions-answers-22

119. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/539/678/2151476/

120. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/525/547/1691820/

121. Source: cia.gov
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp90-00845r000100190004-3

122. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/446/661/2130468/

123. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/blog/summaries-new-decisions-8

124. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/oip/blog/summaries-new-decisions-0

125. Source: justice.gov
Link:https://www.justice.gov/archive/oip/courtdecisions/glomar.html

126. Source: cia.gov
Title: Project AZORIAN
Link:https://www.cia.gov/legacy/museum/exhibit/project-azorian/

127. Source: cia.gov
Title: Glomar Explorer Crew Patch
Link:https://www.cia.gov/legacy/museum/artifact/glomar-explorer-crew-patch/

128. Source: cia.gov
Title: Glomar Explorer Bunk Card
Link:https://www.cia.gov/legacy/museum/artifact/glomar-explorer-bunk-card/

129. Source: cia.gov
Title: Manganese Nodule Encased in Lucite
Link:https://www.cia.gov/legacy/museum/artifact/manganese-nodule-encased-in-lucite/?trk=public_post_comment-text

130. Source: law.justia.com
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/1962/

131. Source: law.justia.com
Title: com903 F.2d
Link:https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/903/

132. Source: archives.gov
Link:https://www.archives.gov/isoo/reports/annual-report-archive.html

133. Source: youtube.com
Title: FOIA Exemption 1: National Security & Classified Info Explained
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ey-mMVxsti4

134. Source: youtube.com
Title: Neither Confirm Nor Deny | Radiolab Podcast
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om8HU79m8Nk

135. Source: aclu.org
Title: ACL U v. CIA
Link:https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-v-cia-foia-case-records-relating-drone-killings?document=aclu-v-cia-stipulation-dismissal-prejudice

136. Source: aclu.org
Title: ACL U v. CIA
Link:https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-v-cia-foia-case-records-relating-drone-killings?document=aclu-v-cia-aclu-opposition-govt-motion-publish-opinion

137. Source: aclu.org
Title: ACL U v. CIA
Link:https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-v-cia-foia-case-records-relating-drone-killings?document=drone-foia-dc-cir-aclu-motion-expedited-briefing

138. Source: aclu.org
Title: ACL U v. CIA
Link:https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-v-cia-foia-case-records-relating-drone-killings?document=drones-foia-district-court-opinion-granting-summary-judgment-cia

139. Source: aclu.org
Title: ACL U v. CIA
Link:https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-v-cia-foia-case-records-relating-drone-killings?document=drones-foia-order-denying-cia-motion-remand

140. Source: aclu.org
Title: ACL U v. CIA
Link:https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-v-cia-foia-case-records-relating-drone-killings?document=drone-foia-cia-status-report

141. Source: aclu.org
Title: ACL U v. CIA
Link:https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-v-cia-foia-case-records-relating-drone-killings?document=drones-foia-aclu-cross-motion-partial-summary-judgment-and-opposition-cia-motion

142. Source: aclu.org
Link:https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/drone-strikes-filing-today-appealing-cias-attempt-hide-worst

143. Source: ro.scribd.com
Link:https://ro.scribd.com/document/472644084/196986

144. Source: internationalflyingsaucerbureau.com
Title: Majestic 12
Link:https://www.internationalflyingsaucerbureau.com/majestic-12/

145. Source: scribd.com
Title: Majestic 12
Link:https://www.scribd.com/document/1606041/Majestic-12

Additional References

146. Source: law.cornell.edu
Title: Legal Information Institute5 U.S. Code § 552
Link:https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/552

147. Source: youtube.com
Title: How Does A Glomar Response Work For FOIA Requests?
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iU7niNZIbs

148. Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sge7ZSXpkvc

149. Source: youtube.com
Title: Project Azorian: The Secret US Mission to Recover a Soviet Submarine
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqGTd3zQSqk

150. Source: congress.gov
Link:https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/RL33320

151. Source: congress.gov
Link:https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12183

152. Source: govinfo.gov
Link:https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscode/2019/title5/partI/chapter5/subchapterII/Sec.%20552a

153. Source: youtube.com
Title: TED Talk: FOIA v. “Glomar” Response
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh6B7xTZDHg

154. Source: openjurist.org
Link:https://openjurist.org/473/f3d/370/wolf-v-central-intelligence-agency-federal-bureau-of-investigation

155. Source: casemine.com
Link:https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5d96d8ab342cca064983e7a0