Baldrige v. Shapiro

Background

Essex County, New Jersey, and the city of Denver asked the Census Bureau to turn over portions of its master address lists and vacancy data so they could challenge local population counts. Essex sought the master address register under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Denver sought the updated address and vacancy lists through civil discovery in federal court. Lower courts split: a New Jersey court ordered disclosure under FOIA and the Third Circuit affirmed, while a Colorado appeals court denied discovery and protected the data.

Reasoning

The Court asked whether sections 8(b) and 9(a) of the Census Act bar disclosure under FOIA or discovery. It held that those provisions are specific withholding statutes under FOIA Exemption 3 and that they protect “raw” census data reported by or on behalf of individuals. The Court relied on the text of the statute, long legislative history, and later congressional amendments that strengthened confidentiality. It concluded the master address and vacancy lists include information given by or on behalf of individuals and therefore fall within the Act’s nondisclosure rules.

Real world impact

Because the Census Act forbids release of such raw data, the Court declined to force disclosure either by FOIA or by civil discovery. Local governments thus cannot obtain these address or vacancy lists from the Bureau unless Congress changes the law. The decision reversed the Third Circuit’s FOIA-based order and affirmed the Tenth Circuit’s denial of discovery, leaving confidentiality protections in place.