Privacy Wins the Day: A Meaningful FOIL Decision out of New York

A recent decision from the New York Court of Appeals delivers an important reminder:  transparency has limits—especially when it comes to personal privacy.

At issue in Matter of James C. Russell v. Town of Mount Pleasant was whether the Town of Mount Pleasant had to disclose the names and email addresses of residents who subscribed to its “E-news” alerts under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL).

The Court said no—and for good reason.

While FOIL promotes open government, it does not come at the expense of individual privacy.  Here, the Court carefully balanced the competing interests and found:

• Subscribers had a strong privacy interest in keeping their information confidential
• Disclosure could expose individuals to unwanted communications and cybersecurity risks, including spoofing
• There was no public interest served by releasing the information

The Court rejected the Petitioner’s argument that disclosure would increase civic engagement and instead found it would either have no effect or a negative effect on public engagement.

First, people would likely hesitate to sign up for a municipality’s email alerts due to privacy and security concerns if they knew their email might be disclosed to third parties.  Further, the Town’s E-news service provided only one-way communications and its current subscribers may have no interest in political discourse.

The takeaway:  Not all government-held information is fair game.  With personal information on the line, the highest Court in New York prioritized privacy and security over a speculative and unsubstantiated public benefit.

For more detail on the decision, view the case here: https://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps///Decisions/2026/Feb26/6opn26-Decision.pdf