Epstein Secrets

onably foreseeable at the time of the withholding. See, e.g.,Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23, 37-38 (D.D.C. 1997) (citing N.L.R.B. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.,437 U.S. 214, 220 (1978)). The government's burden to establish the applicability of Exemption 7(A) is not high; the government need only show that

56 U.S. 595, 602 (1982). Under Exemption 6, a court considers whether the "public interest in disclosure outweighs the individual privacy concerns." Nat'l Assoc. of Hoinebuilders v. Norton, 309 F.3d 26, 35 (D.C. Cr. 2002) (internal quotation marks omitted). But the "only relevant public interest in disclosu

onably foreseeable at the time of the withholding. See, e.g.,Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23, 37-38 (D.D.C. 1997) (citing N.L.R.B. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.,437 U.S. 214, 220 (1978)). The government's burden to establish the applicability of Exemption 7(A) is not high; the government need only show that

56 U.S. 595, 602 (1982). Under Exemption 6, a court considers whether the "public interest in disclosure outweighs the individual privacy concerns." Nat'l Assoc. of Hoinebuilders v. Norton, 309 F.3d 26, 35 (D.C. Cr. 2002) (internal quotation marks omitted). But the "only relevant public interest in disclosu

onably foreseeable at the time of the withholding. See, e.g.,Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23, 37-38 (D.D.C. 1997) (citing N.L.R.B. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.,437 U.S. 214, 220 (1978)). The government's burden to establish the applicability of Exemption 7(A) is not high; the government need only show that

56 U.S. 595, 602 (1982). Under Exemption 6, a court considers whether the "public interest in disclosure outweighs the individual privacy concerns." Nat'l Assoc. of Hoinebuilders v. Norton, 309 F.3d 26, 35 (D.C. Cr. 2002) (internal quotation marks omitted). But the "only relevant public interest in disclosu