Epstein Secrets

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

tenson DecL ¶¶ 49. Each set of records satisfies the two-prong test to fall within the scope of the deliberative process privilege. First, prior to Epstekes suicide, BOP made decisions concerning how to house Epstein and whether or not to house him with a celknate. See Christenson DecL ¶¶ 49a, 49d. The i

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

tenson DecL ¶¶ 49. Each set of records satisfies the two-prong test to fall within the scope of the deliberative process privilege. First, prior to Epstekes suicide, BOP made decisions concerning how to house Epstein and whether or not to house him with a celknate. See Christenson DecL ¶¶ 49a, 49d. The i

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

tenson DecL ¶¶ 49. Each set of records satisfies the two-prong test to fall within the scope of the deliberative process privilege. First, prior to Epstekes suicide, BOP made decisions concerning how to house Epstein and whether or not to house him with a celknate. See Christenson DecL ¶¶ 49a, 49d. The i