Case 1:17-cv-01883 Document 1 Filed 09/13/17 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BENJAMIN WITTES
1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20036
Plaintiff,
v.
U.S. FEDERAL BUREAU OF
INVESTIGATION
935 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20535
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
) Civil Action No. 17-1883
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
COMPLAINT

1.

On May 9, 2017, President Trump fired Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”)

Director James Comey. In the days that followed, President Trump and his staff offered various
justifications for firing Director Comey, claiming that the rank and file of the FBI had lost
confidence in Director Comey’s leadership of the Bureau.
2.

In fact, however, the vast majority of publicly available evidence about the FBI

workforce’s views of Director Comey’s leadership – from the testimony of its Deputy Director,
to workforce surveys in recent years, to attestations of FBI employee and retiree organizations, to
public displays of support from current employees – reveals the positive regard he enjoyed
throughout the Bureau.
3.

Indeed, President Trump’s shifting explanations for firing Director Comey

warrant especially significant scrutiny because, in other contexts, the President has suggested
that his true motivation was to stymie the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the

1

 Case 1:17-cv-01883 Document 1 Filed 09/13/17 Page 2 of 10

2016 presidential election. In a nationally televised interview, as well as a non-public Oval
Office conversation with representatives of the Russian government, President Trump suggested
that the true impetus for firing Director Comey was his desire to stop the FBI’s investigation.
4.

On June 22, 2017, Plaintiff Benjamin Wittes submitted two requests to the FBI

under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) to obtain information related to the White
House’s claims about the views of the FBI workforce concerning Director Comey. The public
has an important interest in knowing whether the President and his White House staff accurately
represented the FBI workforce’s views about Director Comey, or whether this was a pretext to
hide the actual reason that the President fired Director Comey. The FBI has failed to respond to
Plaintiff’s request within the statutory deadline. Plaintiff brings this action against Defendant to
compel compliance with the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5.

The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B)

and 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
6.

Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B).
PARTIES

7.

Plaintiff Benjamin Wittes is the editor-in-chief of Lawfare, an online publication

published by The Lawfare Institute, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit educational organization in
cooperation with The Brookings Institution, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit public policy organization.
Lawfare is dedicated to informing public understanding on operations and activities of the
government. Plaintiff intends to give the public access to documents he obtains via these FOIA
requests on Lawfare’s website (www.lawfareblog.com) and to provide information about and
analysis of those documents as appropriate.

2

 Case 1:17-cv-01883 Document 1 Filed 09/13/17 Page 3 of 10

8.

Defendant FBI is an agency of the federal government of the United States and is

headquartered at 935 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC. Defendant has possession,
custody, and control of the documents that Plaintiff seeks in response to its FOIA request.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
9.

On May 9, 2017, President Trump fired Director Comey. Two days later, in a

nationally televised interview, President Trump explained his reasons for firing Director Comey.
“The FBI has been in turmoil. You know that, I know that, everybody knows that. You take a
look at the FBI a year ago, it was in virtual turmoil – less than a year ago. It hasn’t recovered
from that.”
10.

President Trump’s White House staff also faulted Director Comey’s leadership of

the FBI. Then-Deputy White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders stated on May 10,
2017, the day after Director Comey’s firing: “The president, over the last several months, lost
confidence in Director Comey. The [Justice Department] lost confidence in Director Comey. …
And, most importantly, the rank-and-file of the FBI had lost confidence in their director.”
11.

The next day, Huckabee Sanders reemphasized her point: “I’ve heard from

countless members of the FBI that are grateful and thankful for the president’s decision. … I’ve
certainly heard from a large number of individuals and that’s just myself, and I don’t even know
that many people in the FBI.”
12.

No data or other evidence supports these claim by President Trump and his White

House staff that Director Comey had lost the confidence of the broad FBI workforce.
13.

Almost immediately after stating that Director Comey’s leadership deficiencies

justified his firing, President Trump suggested that the true reason was his own desire to derail
the FBI’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. On May 10, 2017, in an

3

 Case 1:17-cv-01883 Document 1 Filed 09/13/17 Page 4 of 10

Oval Office meeting with senior representatives of the Russian government, President Trump
reportedly stated that “I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” and that “I
faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.” See Matt Apuzzo, Maggie Haberman
and Matthew Rosenberg, “Trump Told Russians that Firing ‘Nut Job’ Comey Eased Pressure
from Investigation,” New York Times (May 19, 2017), available at
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html?mcubz=0.
14.

The next day, in a televised interview with NBC News, the President again linked

his decision to fire Director Comey to the Russia investigation. Asked whether he relied on
advice from the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General in deciding to fire Director
Comey, President Trump responded: “[R]egardless of the recommendation I was going to fire
Comey, knowing there was no good time to do it. And in fact when I decided to just do it, I said
to myself, I said you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story.” See
Partial Transcript: NBC News Interview with Donald Trump, CNN, (May 11, 2017,
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/11/politics/transcript-donald-trump-nbc-news/index.html.
15.

Then-Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe publically contradicted the

President’s claims regarding Director Comey’s supposedly deficient leadership. During
McCabe’s Senate testimony on May 11, 2017, Sen. Martin Heinrich asked him: “[I]s it accurate
that the rank and file no longer supported Director Comey?” McCabe responded: “No, sir, that is
not accurate…the majority – the vast majority of FBI employees enjoyed a deep and positive
connection to Director Comey.”
16.

Annual survey data of FBI field office and headquarters employees bear this out.

In these surveys, employees can score between a low of 1 and high of 5; a score between 3.81
and 5 “indicates success.” For the 2016 and 2017 surveys, when asked about their level of

4

 Case 1:17-cv-01883 Document 1 Filed 09/13/17 Page 5 of 10

respect for FBI senior executives, including the director, FBI field office staff gave scores of
4.25 and 3.97 – that is, “success.” Likewise, “when asked whether the FBI’s senior executives,
including the director, maintained high standards of honesty and integrity, the average scores of
FBI field office staff were 4.1 and 3.96” – also rated as “success in those areas.” Susan
Hennessey & Benjamin Wittes, “Trump’s Lies About James Comey Keep Unraveling,” Foreign
Policy (Aug. 18, 2017), available at http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/18/trumps-lies-about-jamescomey-keep-unraveling.
17.

On his personal evaluation, Director Comey was scored on 72 distinct criteria.

On 68 of them, he scored above a 4.0; he scored above a 4.5 on 33. Id.
18.

In 2017, Director Comey was evaluated by his immediate staff. In rating the

statement “I have trust and confidence in this person as a leader,” they returned a score of
4.47. Id.
19.

That sentiment is reinforced by information gathered by former FBI

counterintelligence analyst Nora Ellingsen, who discussed the issue with approximately 20
former FBI colleagues. Her findings were consistent: “Because the basic truth is that while
Comey was a controversial figure in the larger political system and among Justice Department
officials, he was not a controversial figure at the FBI at all. Nearly everyone loved him. In any
other piece, I would caveat this statement as obvious hyperbole and oversimplification of the
situation, but the degree of consensus on this point as I have talked to people has been
incredible.” See Nora Ellingsen, “On the Mood Among My Former FBI Colleagues,” Lawfare
(June 1, 2017), available at https://www.lawfareblog.com/mood-among-my-former-colleaguesfbi.
20.

Likewise, current FBI employees demonstrated widespread support for Director

5

 Case 1:17-cv-01883 Document 1 Filed 09/13/17 Page 6 of 10

Comey after he was fired. On social media, some FBI agents changed their profile pictures to
Director Comey’s photo, a gesture typically shown to colleagues killed in the line of duty. See
Susan Hennessey & Benjamin Wittes, “Trump’s Lies About James Comey Keep Unraveling,”
Foreign Policy (Aug. 18, 2017), available at http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/18/trumps-liesabout-james-comey-keep-unraveling.
21.

Additionally, professional associations of current and retired FBI personnel have

attested to the workforce’s loyalty to the former director. FBI Special Agent Thomas O’Connor,
President of the 13,000-member FBI Agents Association, said of Director Comey: “His support
within the rank and file of the FBI is overwhelming.” He also stated: “They believe in the guy,
they follow his leadership, and they knew that when Director Comey told them something, that it
was accurate, Constitutional and apolitical.” See Josh Meyer, “FBI Agent Groups Dispute
Trump’s Rationale for Comey Firing,” Politico (May 10, 2017), available at
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/10/comey-firing-fbi-trump-238247.
22.

Likewise, Nancy Savage, Executive Director of the Society of Former Special

Agents of the FBI, which represents 8,500 retired FBI members, has stated that Comey “was a
well-respected, well-liked director.” Id.
23.

The President has broad authority over personnel issues within the Executive

Branch. But in a democracy, it is unacceptable for the President to misinform the American
people about his reasons for firing a senior law enforcement official.
FOIA Requests to FBI and Agency’s Failure to Respond
24.

On June 22, 2017, Plaintiff sent two FOIA requests to Defendant FBI.

25.

In the first request, sent by fax, Plaintiff sought the following records:
1. All records of unclassified communications from Andrew McCabe to the FBI

6

 Case 1:17-cv-01883 Document 1 Filed 09/13/17 Page 7 of 10

workforce1 addressing the firing of Director James Comey, including, but not
limited to, emails, official statements, announcements, and memoranda. The
timeframe for this request is from May 9, 2017, until the date that a search is
conducted for records responsive to this FOIA request.
2. All records of unclassified communications from Associate Deputy Director to
the FBI workforce addressing the firing of Director James Comey, including, but
not limited to, emails, official statements, announcements, and memoranda. The
timeframe for this request is from May 9, 2017, until the date that a search is
conducted for records responsive to this FOIA request.
3. All records of unclassified communications from the Chief of Staff to the FBI
workforce addressing the firing of Director James Comey, including, but not
limited to, emails, official statements, announcements, and memoranda. The
timeframe for this request is from May 9, 2017, until the date that a search is
conducted for records responsive to this FOIA request.
4. All records of unclassified communications from Deputy Chief of Staff to the FBI
workforce addressing the firing of Director James Comey, including, but not
limited to, emails, official statements, announcements, and memoranda. The
timeframe for this request is from May 9, 2017, until the date that a search is
conducted for records responsive to this FOIA request.
5. All records of unclassified communications from any other member of the Senior
Executive Service within the Office of the Director to the FBI workforce
addressing the firing of Director James Comey, including, but not limited to,
emails, official statements, announcements, and memoranda. The timeframe for
this request is from May 9, 2017, until the date that a search is conducted for
records responsive to this FOIA request.
6. In addition to the records requested above, I also request records describing the
processing of this request, including records sufficient to identify search terms
used and locations and custodians searched and any tracking sheets used to track
the processing of this request. If your agency uses FOIA questionnaires or
certifications completed by individual custodians or components to determine
whether they possess responsive materials or to describe how they conducted
searches, I also request any such records prepared in connection with the
processing of this request.
See Exhibit A (FBI FOIA request No. 1).
25.

Plaintiff also requested a fee waiver pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii) or

5U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(ii)(II). See Exhibit A.
1

For purposes of this request, the term “FBI workforce” refers to all FBI employees, in any component or office of
the organization, who would ordinarily receive agency-wide communications.

7

 Case 1:17-cv-01883 Document 1 Filed 09/13/17 Page 8 of 10

26.

Plaintiff received a letter from Defendant FBI dated June 30, 2017. See Exhibit B

(FBI Letter). The letter stated that the agency had assigned the FOIA request tracking number
1378563-000, and further stated: “This letter acknowledges receipt of your Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) request to the FBI which has been received for processing.” The FBI
letter also noted that “[y]our request for a fee waiver is being considered and you will be advised
of the decision at a later date.”
27.

Pursuant to FOIA, within 20 business days of receipt of Plaintiff’s request,

Defendant was required to “determine . . . whether to comply with such request” and to
“immediately notify” Plaintiff of “such determination and the reasons therefor,” and, in the case
of an adverse determination, notify the Plaintiff of his appeal rights. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i).
28.

To date, Defendant has failed to make the required determination and

notifications. Nor has Defendant made a determination regarding Plaintiff’s request for a fee
waiver.
29.

Also on June 22, 2017, Plaintiff submitted a second FOIA request to Defendant

FBI. See Exhibit C (FBI FOIA Request No. 2).
30.

To summarize, Plaintiff sought the following records from several branches of the

FBI, including the National Security Branch; Criminal, Cyber, Response and Services Branch;
Intelligence Branch; Science and Technology Branch; Human Resources Branch; and FBI Field
Offices:
All records of unclassified communications from [leadership of the named branch or
division] to the [named branch or division] workforce addressing the firing of Director
James Comey, including, but not limited to, emails, official statements, announcements,
and memoranda. The timeframe for this request is from May 9, 2017, until the date that a
search is conducted for records responsive to this FOIA request.
In addition to the records requested above, I also request records describing the

8

 Case 1:17-cv-01883 Document 1 Filed 09/13/17 Page 9 of 10

processing of this request, including records sufficient to identify search terms used and
locations and custodians searched and any tracking sheets used to track the processing of
this request. If your agency uses FOIA questionnaires or certifications completed by
individual custodians or components to determine whether they possess responsive
materials or to describe how they conducted searches, I also request any such records
prepared in connection with the processing of this request.
31.

Plaintiff also requested a fee waiver pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii) or 5

U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(ii)(II). See Exhibit C.
32.

The FBI combined Plaintiff’s first and second FOIA requests into a single request

under the same tracking number, 1378563-000, which FBI confirmed to Plaintiff’s counsel in a
letter dated August 22, 2017, from David Hardy, Section Chief of the Record/Information
Dissemination Section of the Records Management Division. See Exhibit D (Hardy Letter).
33.

FBI has failed to make the required determination and notifications regarding the

material in its possession. Nor has FBI made a determination regarding Plaintiff’s request for a
fee waiver.
COUNT I
(Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552)
34.

Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

35.

Defendant is in violation of FOIA by failing to respond to Plaintiff’s requests

within the statutorily prescribed time limit and by unlawfully withholding records responsive to
Plaintiff’s request.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court:
(1) Order Defendant, by a date certain, to conduct a search that is reasonably likely to
lead to the discovery of any and all records responsive to Plaintiff’s requests;
(2) Order Defendant, by a date certain, to demonstrate that it has conducted an adequate

9

 Case 1:17-cv-01883 Document 1 Filed 09/13/17 Page 10 of 10

search;
(3) Order Defendant, by a date certain, to produce to Plaintiff any and all non-exempt
records, or portions of records, responsive to Plaintiff’s request, as well as a Vaughn index of any
records, or portions of records, withheld due to a claim of exemption;
(4) Enjoin Defendant from improperly withholding records responsive to Plaintiff’s
request;
(5) Order Defendant to grant Plaintiff’s request for a fee waiver;
(6) Grant Plaintiff an award of attorney fees and other reasonable litigation costs pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E); and
(7) Grant Plaintiff such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.

Respectfully submitted,
Date: September 13, 2017

/s/ Justin Florence
JUSTIN FLORENCE (Bar No. 988953)
Justin.Florence@protectdemocracy.org
LAURENCE M. SCHWARTZTOL
(pro hac vice to be filed)
Larry.Schwartztol@protectdemocracy.org
The Protect Democracy Project, Inc.
2020 Pennsylvania Ave., NW #163
Washington, DC 20006
Phone: 202-599-0466
Fax: 929-777-8428
Counsel for Plaintiff

10