Welcome to MuckRock's Illinois Freedom of Information Act. appeal guide!

Each entry provides background and context about an exemption to the public records laws in all fifty states, as well as federal FOIA. Read more about Illinois's public records law or explore all our expert FOIA guides. Have a public records appeal or information on an exemption we should include? Consider sharing your knowledge with everyone by donating your FOIA appeal language.

Security Threats exemption

Also known as 5 ILCS 140/7-1(v) 5 ILCS 140/7(1)(v).

Thank you to Curtis Waltman for contributing to this entry. This guide is for informational purposes only, is general in nature, and is not legal opinion nor legal advice regarding any specific issue or factual circumstance.

Referred to as the Security Threats exemption, 7(1)(v) deals with “vulnerability assessments, security measures, and response policies or plans that are designed to identify, prevent or respond to potential attacks upon a community’s systems, population, facilities, or installations.” Also covered by the exemption are records dealing with “mobilization or deployment of personnel or equipment, the operation of communication systems or protocols, or tactical operations.” That doesn’t mean necessarily that those documents aren’t possible to receive. The application of the Security Threats exemption is limited to “when destruction or contamination would constitute a clear and present danger to the health or safety of the community, but only to the extent that disclosure could reasonably be expected to jeopardize the effectiveness of the measures or the safety of the public or the personnel who implement the security measures.”

To successfully appeal a denial under the Security Threats exemption, one must prove that the records requested do not in fact present any real danger to the public or law enforcement if disclosed. In 2010 a reporter with The Chicago Tribune filed a request with the Chicago Police Department (CPD) for the number of officers in each district and was denied under 7(1)(b). He appealed arguing that figures concerning the number of officers in given districts put no limitations on security measures and that the CPD misunderstood the exemption itself which, “[ b] y its terms, . . . is limited to situations where destruction or contamination of facilities would cause a clear and present danger to public health.” Due to the CPD not being able to prove that disclosing the documents would have any bearings on security measures to structures in the city or security measures used by the Department, the Public Access Counselor ordered the documents released.

If you come across any court cases concerning agencies invoking 7(1)(v) in Illinois let us know by shooting us an e-mail at info@muckrock.com

Proper Use

  • Denying access to information that limits the effectiveness of security measures

  • Denying access to information that would lead to clear and present danger to public health

Improper Use

  • Denying access to information that does not limit the effectiveness of security measures or cause any clear danger to public health or facilities