A federal statute known as the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) establishes a general rule that federal agencies must make records and documents publicly available upon submission of a proper request. However, if those records or documents fall within certain exemptions set forth in FOIA, they can be withheld from public disclosure. 

After the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) conducted an investigation of AT&T regarding AT&T’s possible overbilling of the government under an FCC-administered program, the FCC and AT&T entered into an agreement to settle any allegations of wrongdoing. The agreement included a payment from AT&T to the government of $500,000, though AT&T admitted no wrongdoing.

Subsequently, a trade association and some of AT&T’s competitors submitted a FOIA request to the FCC for records related to the investigation. The FCC withheld certain documents that contained AT&T trade secrets, pursuant to a specific FOIA exemption. But the FCC determined that other documents not containing trade secrets had to be disclosed despite AT&T’s contention that they should not be disclosed under Exemption 7(C), which exempts “records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes” if the records “could reasonably be expected to constitute unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” The FCC determined that Exemption 7(C) did not apply, because corporations like AT&T, unlike humans, do not possess “personal privacy” interests. 

This dispute ultimately ended up in court, requiring judges to determine the meaning of “personal privacy” in Exemption 7(C). How might a judge go about determining whether Exemption 7(C) applies to AT&T’s interests?