[国会记录：2010年11月15日（参议院）] [Page S7885-S7886]信息自由法案雷利先生。总统先生，在未来几个月，美国最高法院将考虑联邦通信委员会诉AT＆T  - 一个巨大的信息法案，FOIA，可能会大大扩大企业权利从公众屏蔽活动的案例看法。与我们政府中透明，透明度和问责制的许多美国人一样，我敦促法院拒绝努力扩大对FOIA的个人隐私免除，包括公司信息。大会在国会首次颁布了“信息法案的自由”之后，国会为该敏感个人信息的执法记录创造了豁免。用于执法记录的所谓的“个人隐私豁免” -  FOIA豁免7（c） - 允许政府扣留其调查文件中所载的信息，即“可以合理地预期”构成个人入侵的个人侵犯隐私。“”通过创造这种豁免，国会旨在屏蔽公开披露有关可能在政府档案中提及的个人的个人信息。但是，国会从来没有打算这种豁免申请公司。个人隐私豁免的立法历史明确表示，国会旨在保护个人隐私权的豁免。事实上，当参议院于1974年5月辩论这一豁免时，他起草了个人隐私豁免的参议员菲利普霍特，评论了“豁免”中包含的个人隐私的保护。 . . is part of the sixth exemption [to FOIA] in the present law. By adding the protective language here, we simply make clear that the protections in the sixth exemption for personal privacy also apply to disclosure under the seventh exemption. I wish to also make it clear, in case there is any doubt, that this clause is intended to protect the privacy of any person mentioned in the requested files, and not only the person who is the object of the investigation.'' Former Senator Roman Hruska also confirmed that Congress intended for the exemption to address individual privacy rights. Regarding the personal privacy exemption, he said ``we are dealing in this matter with what I believe to be the most important rights, and in some respect the most important rights, an individual may possess, his right to privacy, and his right to personal safety.'' The universal understanding that the personal privacy exemption pertains only to the privacy rights of individuals is further confirmed by the remarks of former Senator Strom Thurmond, who noted during the Senate debate that ``[a]ll of us are aware of the general feeling permeating the country, that our citizens want to know what their Government is doing . . . However, by the same token, we are also concerned about a mutual problem of invasion of an individual's privacy.'' During the more than four decades since the Congress enacted the personal privacy exemption to FOIA, our Federal courts and Federal agencies have consistently interpreted this exemption to apply only to individuals. [[Page S7886]] Over the years, the Congress--with the full knowledge of how the courts have interpreted this exemption--has never amended this exemption, nor called into question the universally held view that the exemption protects the personal privacy rights of individuals. Given the clear legislative history and the longstanding case precedent in this area, I am deeply troubled by recent efforts to vastly--and I believe improperly--expand the scope of this exemption to reach corporations. While I do not quibble with the notion that certain corporate information should be exempt from public disclosure, I firmly believe that Congress has provided meaningful and adequate protections for sensitive corporate information in other parts of FOIA. Indeed, Congress specifically enacted FOIA exemption 4 to protect trade secrets and other sensitive corporate information from public disclosure. Tellingly, American corporations have successfully relied upon exemption 4 for decades, to safeguard their sensitive business information when it is shared with the government. I fear that vastly expanding the personal privacy exemption for law enforcement records would close a vital window into how our government works. I also fear that extending this exemption to corporations would permit corporations to shield from public view critical information about public health and safety, environmental dangers, and financial misconduct, among other things--to the great detriment of the people's right to know and to our democracy. As Senator Hart wisely noted during the debate of the 1974 FOIA amendments, ``survival for a society such as ours hinges very importantly on the access that a citizen can have to the performance of those he has hired.'' I sincerely hope that our Nation's highest Court will carefully consider these words and that the Court will narrowly construe the personal privacy exemption, consistent with congressional intent. Should the Court decide to do otherwise, I will work with others in the Congress to ensure that FOIA, and specifically the personal privacy exemption for law enforcement records, remains a meaningful safeguard for the American people's right to know. ____________________