老澳门开奖结果

This piece was originally published in .

For more than three years, the 老澳门开奖结果 and the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University have been litigating a series of Freedom of Information Act requests relating to 鈥減republication review.鈥� Under this far-reaching censorship system, millions of current and former government employees, contractors, and even interns must submit their manuscripts for official review prior to publication. Virtually everyone seems to agree that the system is .

The thousands of documents that have been released in response to our FOIA litigation paint a picture of a system that is . Because there is no executive- branch鈥搘ide policy on the review process, each agency has its own. Agency regimes comprise a tangle of regulations, policies, and nondisclosure agreements. Submission and review standards, review timelines, and appeals processes are vague and confusing.

Today, we鈥檙e releasing an that reflects our effort to make sense of this system. We鈥檙e hoping that the chart will enable users to study and compare the key features of the prepublication review regimes of the seventeen intelligence agencies, and of three of the standard agreements those agencies typically require individuals to sign as a condition of access to classified information. The chart also includes links to annotated versions of the underlying regulations, policies, and agreements. Many of these were not available publicly until we sued for their release.

While we hope the chart goes some way towards clarifying the system, we can鈥檛 claim to have it all figured out. (In fact, the incoherence of the system is one of the things we pointed to in arguing, in a , that the system is unconstitutional.)