1. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(1) – Need to Know within Agency
2. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(2) – Required FOIA Disclosure
3. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(3) – Routine Uses
4. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(4) – Bureau of the Census
5. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(5) – Statistical Research
6. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(6) – National Archives
7. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(7) – Law Enforcement Request
8. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(8) – Health or Safety of an Individual
9. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(9) – Congress
10. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(10) – Government Accountability Office
11. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(11) – Court Order
12. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(12) – Debt Collection Act
[for a deeper analysis of these exceptions, join me on Patreon.]
Moreover, James asserts that the ability to freeze or cut federal payments lies solely with Congress. The plaintiffs argue that giving Musk’s DOGE such power could disrupt essential government functions and harm citizens who rely on these funds for vital services.
However, the legal counterarguments favor the President’s executive authority, particularly his power to reorganization authority, which allows for the consolidation, abolition, or creation of agencies within the executive branch.
Also, conveniently omitted in James’ lawsuit is any deference, given to the President’s reorganization authority vested in him under the Reorganization Act of 1939, which granted the President the power to reorganize the executive branch. This authority has been extended to various presidents through different legislative acts over the years.
“These omissions in James’ lawsuit undermine the core of her credibility and expose the lack of merit in her complaint.” – Samuel A. Lopez, Legal Analyst
