A Decade of Decay: Why the Freedom of Information Act is at a Breaking Point

This report originally appeared in The Nuance, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press’s newsletter on the legal and policy issues at the forefront of a free press.

Ten years have passed since the U.S. Congress last enacted significant amendments to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the bedrock law designed to keep the federal government transparent and accountable to its citizens. When the Obama administration signed the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 into law, the mood in the transparency community was one of cautious optimism. The reforms were designed to streamline the request process, mandate proactive disclosure, and curb the systemic abuse of the law’s nine exemptions.

Today, that optimism has evaporated. A decade later, the promise of a more open government has been replaced by a reality of unprecedented backlogs, aggressive redaction, and a calculated, high-level effort to dismantle the machinery of transparency.

The Chronology of a Declining System

The trajectory of federal transparency has been marked by a slow erosion of standards followed by a sharp, recent decline.

• 2016: Congress passes the FOIA Improvement Act, establishing the "foreseeable harm" standard. This standard requires agencies to demonstrate that disclosure would actually harm an interest protected by an exemption before withholding information. It was hailed as a turning point.
• 2017–2024: Despite the 2016 reforms, agencies continued to rely on the "glomar" response (neither confirming nor denying the existence of records) and expansive redactions. Processing times began to creep upward as the digital era created a "data deluge" that agency systems were ill-equipped to handle.
• 2025: Federal data revealed that over 81% of substantively processed FOIA requests were either denied in part or in full. Backlogs reached an all-time high of 339,671 pending requests, representing a 195% increase since the 2016 amendments.
• 2026–Present: Following the return of the Trump administration, the focus shifted from bureaucratic inertia to active dismantling. Significant staffing cuts (14% across the federal government) and unprecedented attempts at mass-cancellation of requests have signaled a move toward a "closed-door" policy.

Supporting Data: The Statistics of Stagnation

The crisis in FOIA is not merely anecdotal; it is a measurable failure of the administrative state to honor its statutory obligations. The metrics provided by the federal government paint a grim picture of a system struggling to survive.

The Delay Epidemic

Speed is the currency of investigative journalism. However, the average processing time for "simple" FOIA requests has surged by nearly 73%. In Fiscal Year 2016, a simple request took approximately 28 days to process. By FY 2025, that number had ballooned to 48.5 days. For complex requests, which require inter-agency consultation or classified reviews, the wait can span years, effectively killing stories before they can ever be reported.

The Backlog Crisis

The sheer volume of unresolved requests has become a mountain that agencies refuse to climb. The growth from 115,080 backlogged requests in 2016 to 339,671 in 2025 is not merely a sign of increased interest; it is a sign of systemic collapse.

The Denial Rate

With 81% of requests meeting some form of denial, the "presumption of disclosure"—the foundational principle of FOIA—has effectively been flipped. Agencies now operate under a default presumption of secrecy, placing the burden on journalists and researchers to fight for every page through costly and time-consuming litigation.

The Case for Reform: Expert Perspectives

To understand the path forward, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) consulted with two of the nation’s leading experts on transparency litigation: Adam Marshall, Director of National Litigation, and Staff Attorney Gunita Singh. Their consensus is clear: the law is not just broken; it is obsolete in its current form.

"We are at a point where the law requires a structural overhaul, not just minor tweaks," says Marshall. "The current system is designed for a paper-based bureaucracy in a digital age, and it is being exploited by those who wish to hide the truth."

Implementing a Public Interest Balancing Test

Currently, many FOIA exemptions are absolute. If a document fits a category, an agency can withhold it regardless of the public’s need for that information. RCFP argues for a mandatory "public interest balancing test." Under this framework, agencies would be legally required to weigh the public’s right to know against the government’s interest in secrecy. If the public interest in disclosure—such as uncovering health hazards or corruption—outweighs the government’s justification for secrecy, the records must be released.

Enforcing Timely Compliance through Financial Penalties

The law currently lacks "teeth." When an agency misses a deadline, there are rarely consequences. RCFP suggests that Congress mandate that agencies pay the attorney’s fees of requesters in every instance where an agency fails to meet statutory response deadlines. By tying agency budgets to their performance in transparency, Congress would create a powerful incentive to modernize, hire, and prioritize FOIA compliance.

Strengthening Proactive Disclosure

Why wait for a request? The most efficient FOIA request is the one that never has to be filed. RCFP advocates for a statutory requirement that high-interest records—such as leadership calendars, major contract awards, and Inspector General reports—be published automatically online. This would reduce the administrative burden on agencies and provide the public with the information they need without the friction of the request process.

A "FOIA Court": A Radical or Necessary Evolution?

Perhaps the most ambitious proposal is the creation of a specialized "FOIA Court." Currently, disputes must wind their way through the general federal court system, which is expensive, slow, and intimidating for smaller newsrooms.

A dedicated FOIA court, similar to a bankruptcy or trade court, could focus exclusively on public records disputes. By utilizing a "decide on the papers" model—where cases are resolved based on written submissions rather than lengthy, expensive discovery—the process could be shortened from years to weeks. The state of Ohio has already pioneered a similar model, showing that specialized adjudication can resolve public records disputes with speed and fairness.

Official Responses and Political Implications

The current administration has taken an overtly adversarial stance toward transparency. The recent 14% reduction in FOIA staff, as documented by The Washington Post, is widely viewed by legal advocates as a deliberate strategy to starve the law of its functional capacity. Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Energy’s recent attempt to mass-cancel thousands of pending requests has sent a chilling message to journalists and watchdogs: the government is no longer interested in providing records that might prove politically inconvenient.

These moves have drawn sharp condemnation from civil liberties groups, but they also reflect a growing trend of "executive exceptionalism," where the White House seeks to consolidate power by restricting the flow of information to the public.

Conclusion: The Roadmap Ahead

The Freedom of Information Act remains a vital tool for democracy, but it is currently gasping for air. The 2016 reforms were a necessary step, but they failed to account for the political will of administrations that prioritize secrecy over public trust.

For the press and the public, the roadmap for reform is clear:

1. Balance: Force agencies to weigh public interest against secrecy.
2. Accountability: Penalize agencies for delays.
3. Efficiency: Create a specialized court to resolve disputes quickly.
4. Transparency: Mandate proactive disclosure of high-value data.

Without these reforms, the promise of FOIA will continue to fade, leaving the American public in the dark regarding the inner workings of their own government. The time to act is not next year or in the next decade—the time to protect the public’s right to know is now.

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press continues to litigate for the public’s right to access records. If you have suggestions for further reform or want to share your experience with the FOIA process, please contact the team at [email protected].

Research for this report was contributed by RCFP intern Vivian Rong.