Illinois State Police properly withheld FOID card data under 7.5(v)

This reading view follows the source PDF's positioned text blocks. Page headers, repeated office furniture, and lower-margin notes are kept out of the narrative; source notes are available below. Reconstruction is automatic and imperfect — the PDF is the authoritative version, and it's linked on this page.

Dear Ms. Assad and Ms. Martynowski:

This determination is issued pursuant to section 9.5(f) of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) ( 5 ILCS 140/ 9.5(f) (West 202 2 ), as amended by Public Act 103 -069, effective January 1, 2024 ). For the reasonsthat follow, the Public Access Bureau concludes that the Illinois State Police (ISP) did not violate FOIA by withholding data responsive to Ms. Samah Assad 's August 29, 2023 , FOIA request.

On that date, Ms. Assad submitted a FOIA request to ISP on behalf of CBS 2 Chicago seeking "data, in its original Excel/spreadsheet format, showing the number of Illinois residents who were issued a FOID [1] card, broken down by year and by county, from Jan. 1, 2010 through the day in which this request is fulfilled[,]" as well as "that same data, broken down by Ms. Assad exchanged a series of e -mails with Ms. Arnold, which resulted in ISP declining to provide the data because: " Running historical reports containing the number of FOID applications broken down by county for each year going back to 2010 would requi re ISP to request its vendor stop working on critical, time sensitive tasks mandated by law in order to create a program to run a report."7 In her Request for Review, submitted November 3, 2023, Ms. Assad argues:

While ISP cites 5 ILCS 140/ 7.5(v) to justify withholding, that exemption does not apply here. CBS 2 did not ask for the names and personal information of people who have applied for or received FOID cards. CBS 2 also did not request any databases under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act, or any other records from the Concealed Carry Licensing Review Board. CBS 2 asked for aggregate, anonymized statistics broken down by year, county and zip code.[8]

DETERMINATION

All records in the custody or possession of a public body are presumed to be open to inspection or copying." 5 ILCS 140/1.2 (West 2022 ); see also Southern Illinoisan v. Illinois Department of Public Health , 218 Ill. 2d 390, 415 (2006). A public body that withholds records "has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence" that the records are exempt from disclosure. 5 ILCS 140/ 1.2 (West 202 2 ). The exemptions from disclosure are to be narrowly construed. Lieber v. Board of Trustees of Southern Illinois University , 176 Ill. 2d 401, 407 (1997).

Section 7.5(v) of FOIA exempts from disclosure:

Names and information of people who have applied for or received Firearm Owner's Identification Cards under the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act or applied for or received a concealed carry license under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act, unless otherwise authorized by the Firearm Concealed Carry Act; and databases under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act , records of the Concealed Carry Licensing Review Board under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act, and law enforcement agency objections under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act. ( Emphasis added.)

Correspondingly, section 10(i) of the Firearm Concealed Carry Act 9 authorizes the creation of the databases at issue in section 7.5(v) of FOIA :

The Illinois State Police shall maintain a database of license applicants and licensees . The database shall be available to all federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies, State's Attorneys, the Attorney General, and authorized court personnel. Within 180 days after July 9, 2013 (the effective date of this Act), the database shall be searchable and provide all information included in the application, including the applicant' s previous addresses within the 10 years prior to the license application and any information related to violations of this Act. No law enforcement agency, State's Attorney, Attorney General, or In its response to this office, ISP explained that "Ms. Assad's request was not denied as unduly burdensome; it was denied because data contained in ISP's Firearms Services Bureau' s licensing database ( FLARES) is exempt from disclosure." 10 ISP asserted:

The FLARES database was established pursuant to the Firearm Concealed Carry Act requirement that ISP maintain a database of concealed carry license applicants and licensees (430 ILCS 66/1 et seq.). FOID information is also housed in FLARES. As such, FOID data is exempt from disclosure pursuant to section 7.5(v) of FOIA, which provides in pertinent part: "databases under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act" are exempt from disclosure. Senior Assistant Attorney General Edie Steinberg most recently confirmed in a determination letter dated September 1, 2023, that FOID data/stats are exempt from disclosure. While aggregate data about FOID cards may not necessarily be categorized as information of people " who obtained FOID cards, that data is maintained in a database that is exempt from disclosure pursuant to 7.5(v) of FOIA.[ 11]

In this passage, ISP referenced a recent determination letter (Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 76411, issued September 1, 2023) in which this office concluded that data about returned FOID cards and firearm dispossession records were exempt from disclosure under section 7.5(v) of FOIA because they were contained in the FLARES database.

ISP also explained that the communications from Ms. Arnold to Ms. Assad pertained to Ms. Assad's status as a member of the media, rather than the confines of FOIA:

As a courtesy to the media, specifically requests seeking records not available for release pursuant to FOIA, ISP 's FOIA Unit commonly supplies ISP's Public Information Office contact information. Although the intent is not clear in the denial, this is to give media requesters access to records that may be available for Ms. Assad replied by contending that "[ i]n its answer, the ISP heavily relies on semantics and contradictions – none of which justify or even address the improper Freedom of Information Act denial." 13 Noting that ISP denied the request because it asserted that information in the FLARES database is exempt from disclosure, Ms. Assad reiterated that she was seeking anonymized information. Ms. Assad further argued:

ISP also cites an exemption for databases under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act. But that exemption applies only to " names and information of people." I am not seeking names and information of specific people. Again, I am seeking only anonymized data – like the data ISP has released in the past on its own volition.

ISP's letter does not explain why the specific information I'm seeking would fall under the exemptions they cited.

And, in fact, ISP acknowledges ( despite the specter of privacy interests it raises here) that it has affirmatively chosen to make similar information publicly available to the media. Considering the voluntary disclosure of this information by ISP previously, it is difficult to seriously credit ISP 's privacy arguments here.[14]

ISP has adequately explained that the requested data is exempt from disclosure because it is contained within the FLARES database , which was created pursuant to the Firearm Concealed Carry Act. Although Ms. Assad argues that the section 7.5(v) exemption is limited to The Public Access Counselor has determined that resolution of this matter does not require the issuance of a binding opinion. This letter shall serve to close this matter. If you have any questions, please contact me at the Chicago addresslisted on the first page of this letter.

Very truly yours, JOSHUA M. JONES Deputy Bureau Chief Public Access Bureau 78862 f 75v proper pd sa