This post is part of the Intergenerational Conversations series.

Verne Harris and Christopher Merrett, “Toward a Culture of Transparency: Public Rights of Access to Official Records in South Africa,” American Archivist 57, no. 4 (1994): 680–92, https://doi.org/10.17723/aarc.57.4.62476v2610630817.

Reviewed by Burkely Hermann, MLIS [PDF Full Text] | [PDF Article + Full Text]

In late April 1994, the African National Congress won a majority of the seats in the National Assembly, in the first democratic and multiracial election in South Africa’s history, culminating the end of apartheid rule. A few months later, South Africa’s State Archives Service Deputy Director Verne Harris and University of Natal Deputy University Librarian Christopher Merrett wrote about the public’s right to access official records in an article entitled “Toward a Culture of Transparency: Public Rights of Access to Official Records in South Africa.” They concluded that official secrecy of South Africa’s apartheid regime severely restricted this public right. They asserted that such public rights, the related rights to scrutinize government processes, government transparency, and access to information, and the right to know how the government functions, are essential components of a thriving democracy. Although their scholarly editorial was published more than thirty years ago, it remains timely and relevant. Unlike South Africa, which was moving from a repressive regime to a democratic government, the US is moving the opposite way, with increasing archival restrictions and faltering democratic norms.

Archives preserve records of institutions such as government entities, for-profit organizations, and nonprofit organizations with the goal of ensuring accountability, responsibility, and transparency. These archives are managed by archivists who make the determination as to which records have permanent and enduring value and contain “essential evidence of society.”[1] Archivists also collect, organize, and provide access to these records. These foundational principles, which are sometimes enshrined in law, are central to the duties of archivists. They work to inform the recordkeeping practices of these archivists, which can differ depending on the institution. Many archivists, such as Lara Wilson at the University of Victoria, have criticized these practices for reinforcing injustices.[2]

Recent news has made clear how archival records can be used for political purposes. Consider the scandal, this past autumn, over the unauthorized and illegal release of Democratic Governor Rebecca Michelle “Mikie” Sherrill’s unredacted military records to her Republican gubernatorial opponent, Jack Ciattarelli, by the National Personnel Records Center, a division of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Sherrill condemned the release, arguing it exposed “private records for political gain” and asserted that “no veteran’s record is safe.” Moreover, House Democratic leaders, such as Hakeem Jeffries and Adam Smith, called for criminal investigations.[3] This contrasts with the use of secrecy by the South African apartheid regime to protect political interests. Harris and Merrett called upon citizens and civil society organizations to challenge this regime in “imaginative ways” (p. 685).

NARA’s acting inspector general, William “Will” Brown, began an investigation. Acting Director of Congressional Affairs Grace McCaffrey, another NARA official, blamed a records technician. She said that the unnamed person did not follow standard operating procedures when releasing records to former Republican congressional candidate Nicholas De Gregorio, a confidant and ally of Ciatterelli. Other reporting stated that the disclosure potentially eschewed the Privacy Act of 1974 and exemptions established under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).[4] For archivists, this breach of public trust blatantly violates the Society of American Archivists (SAA) Code of Ethics. The latter calls upon archivists to respect “interests of … individuals … whose public and private lives and activities are documented in archival holdings” through restrictions to maintain privacy and confidentiality.[5]

This scandal is only one example of recent ethical lapses by NARA. In March of last year, unredacted records related to the assassination of John F. Kennedy Jr., including “Social Security numbers of living individuals” were published online, with the agency defending this release as a form of transparency.  Some organizations described the release as containing a “treasure trove of new revelations.”[6] The balance of privacy, confidentiality, and public access was central to the arguments of Harris and Merrett, who generally favored public access while also leaning toward restrictions to protect people’s right to privacy and the “defense and national security interests” of South Africa (pp. 686, 689–90).

The release of these records in conjunction with forcing out other top leaders at NARA, as well as the firing of archivists and cultural heritage workers at the agency such as Archivist of the United States Colleen Shogan,[7] in February of last year, threatens possible long-term damage to the field of archival studies. Furthermore, apart from the importance of ensuring privacy and sanctity of personal information, reputational damage is growing, as the agency’s staff has shrunk by over 500 employees since January of last year and the agency recently announced plans to close three federal records centers in the Chicago, San Francisco, and Seattle areas.[8] The trustworthiness and credibility of NARA to serve as a steward of public information has been undermined. This was implied by SAA in their statement on the release of Sherrill’s records, noting that government archives have a crucial responsibility to ensure privacy and sanctity of public information. Former employees expressed worry that the agency was becoming politicized, while others described the administration’s actions toward the agency as a “hostile takeover.”[9]

For Harris and Merrett, the situation was different. They state that although investigative journalism weakened official secrecy in South Africa, secrecy remained intact. This was especially present in matters related to nuclear armament and the country’s nuclear program, and materials described as “incriminating.” Official secrecy and deliberate destruction of records, in certain instances, aimed to create an “enforced amnesia” among the population (pp. 683–4). Harris and Merrett called upon South Africans to “reclaim their history” and supported government accountability for apartheid-era repression (pp. 684–5).

Privacy and confidentiality within archives are contested topics. Archivists often make private histories and details accessible through deeds of gift with permission from donors. Scholarship has noted unique challenges to providing access to records about survivors of child abuse, called for nuance when considering whether records are made digitally available, and examined policies and practices in state archives around accessing restricted records for social research purposes.[10] NARA’s release of unredacted records in two instances in 2025 betrays the ethical commitment to respect privacy rights of users and maintain confidentiality of their records, as SAA’s Core Values clearly state.[11] Unfortunately, archival scholarship about unauthorized releases of personal information, such as someone’s physical location, in order to damage their reputation, otherwise known as doxxing or doxing, is almost non-existent. Despite the lack of scholarship, it remains a present problem.[12] In fact, some of those named in the March 2025 release of documents by NARA have threatened to sue the agency, stating that the US government violated the Privacy Act and doxxed them through the release of their Social Security numbers.[13]

Secrecy is fundamental to the US system of government, with public officials preferring to operate outside of public view, rather than be transparent.[14] Acquiring information on certain topics is becoming difficult, if not impossible, despite “legitimate questions of public interest,” just as it was in South Africa (pp. 681–2). As Freedom of the Press Foundation Government Secrecy Expert Lauren Harper noted, FOIA has “long been neglected by Democratic and Republican administrations alike” with soaring backlogs and non-existent funding, meaning that FOIA offices are forced “to compete for resources.”[15] Harper also criticized the administration’s “excessive secrecy” in relation to tactics aiming to target journalists and “hollow out” the government’s “transparency infrastructure.”[16] Participatory democracy aims to ensure that educated people make informed choices and judgments; that democratic promise is slipping away in the US. Such a reality stands in the face of calls for government transparency and public discourse back in 1994.

The work of Harris and Merrett is further relevant to recent police operations in the US since both scholars described South African government actions from the 1950s to 1980s aiming to restrict information about topics of public interest, such as police involvement in South African repression, prison conditions, and detention without trial (pp. 681–2). Take, for example, the deployment of the National Guard and other US government agents, beginning last year, to Chicago’s predominantly Latino neighborhoods under the code name “Operation Midway Blitz” that is shrouded in secrecy. Journalists do not know the operation’s basic facts, including how many government agents have been deployed or who has been arrested. This has been described as part of a larger pattern of federal government secrecy, with some stating that the government is spreading “active propaganda” to obscure the reality.[17] Some organizations have aimed to preserve similar records centered around police and state violence, as well as stories and experiences of immigrants.[18]

Harris and Merrett spoke about efforts to restrict access and destroy historical records in order to weaken public knowledge about events within South Africa. This is analogous to the current situation in the US. One analysis noted gaps between official US government claims about immigration arrests and independent data, raising questions as to how arrest data is reported and counted, with the US government losing access to a database over concerns that data was misused.[19] There were additional reports that possibly hundreds of individuals, primarily immigrants, went missing from the official US government detainee locator database.[20] On a related note, NARA’s page on records management notes examples of unfounded and founded records destruction, with the disturbing impression that this is a routine occurrence. One case, which closed in April 2025, involved the loss of a “large volume of high-value permanent records” dating from 1950 to 1990 from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) due to a damaged hard-drive with the paper originals previously destroyed without authorization.[21]

At the same time, civil society organizations within the US have generally acted in a manner similar to what Harris and Merrett suggested: they serve as society’s watchdogs on censorship, public information, and transparency; act independent of government; and reinforce the ideal of dissenting and “unfettered questioning” in order to ensure a nation’s heath (p. 685). For example, a few years ago in May 2021, eighty civil society groups requested revaluation of the Department of Homeland Security records schedules, stating that a proposed records deposition included files documenting abuse, civil rights violations, misconduct, and abuse of those held in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facilities.[22] This followed a federal judge stopping ICE from destroying records by invalidating one of the records schedules that was challenged in March 2021.[23]

Archivists in the US and South Africa approach recordkeeping problems with contrasting mindsets. In South Africa, “optimum access” to archival records was embodied in the professional code in 1994, as Harris and Merrett note (p. 686). Presently, the main organization for South African archivists, the South African Society of Archivists (SASA), stands for ethical conduct, trustworthiness, empathy, teamwork, accountability, and transparency. While many of these values are also present in the core values and ethics of SAA, the latter also calls for advocacy, diversity, social responsibility, responsible stewardship, and sustainability, values which SASA does not appear to aspire to, indicating a different focus of each organization.[24] The differing values of each organization indicates that although recordkeeping must be tailored to specific communities and situations, certain similar core values must be retained to ensure effective international collaboration, particularly on topics, events, and situations of historical significance to underrepresented communities.

The current US government has, like public organizations in South Africa described by Harris and Merrett, destroyed records to manage political risks and limit accountability (p. 684). Since January 2025, the US government has systematically removed critical environmental and climate data and dismantled public access to this information.[25] There also has been deregulation, misinformation, and refusal to disclose information. Earlier in 2025, possibly key classified documents were destroyed when the US Agency for International Development, otherwise known as USAID, was unilaterally abolished by the US government. This occurred contrary to established law, such as the Federal Records Act. Disturbingly, US federal judges refused to issue restraining orders to stop the destruction, accepting the government’s arguments that the documents were “old” and “unneeded.”[26]

Harris and Merrett asserted that it was “widely accepted” that governments have “a legitimate right … to restrict access to certain information” (p. 685). However, they asserted that such restrictions should be narrow and only follow “legitimate parameters” and not cover up “human rights abuses, corruption, and maladministration” (p. 685). They assert that archivists, particularly those of public institutions, have a professional obligation to ensure the widest possible access to archival records in their care while respecting “legitimate limitations” (pp. 686–7). To ensure that the public’s right to access these records is maintained, archivists must face those individuals who attempt to make public information less accessible and erode the public’s right to know.[27] The aforementioned parameters are informed by the fact that in South Africa, at that time of Harris and Merrett’s article, official records were either in a state office that inherited or generated them, or within a repository of the country’s archives. Such records were subject to existing legal requirements, even as official secrecy became a legal method to restrict certain information, with secrecy acting like a “corrosive disease” that engendered some conformity (p. 685).[28]

The authors’ scholarly conclusions continue to remain relevant. Recently, there has been a push toward increasing control and secrecy around information by the US government. For instance, even though raids by ICE are public, officials deny the raids took place when journalists try to obtain search or arrest warrants. According to David Cuillier, who directs the Joseph L. Brechner Freedom of Information Project at University of Florida, ICE has said that these warrants are secret and cannot be confirmed or denied. He asserts that ICE is throwing a “cloak of secrecy” on their operations by keeping the identities of those arrested a secret, in contrast to openness by “a lot of county sheriffs and police departments.”[29] Even so, Cuillier grants there are “valid reasons” for secrecy in certain instances.

While Harris and Merrett call for changing “legitimate parameters” on keeping information secret by ensuring more robust public access, they concede that governance requires “some measure of extended confidentiality” (p. 689). This means, in their view, that archivists must respect “rights to confidentiality” during the closed period, which can last as long as thirty-five years (p. 689). It also necessitates, according to Harris and Merrett, open access consistent with “public interest.” Such access does not mean, in their view, indiscriminately opening all official records. It requires, instead, fostering government transparency and public debate, a view which aligns with the arguments of recognized archival theorist T. R. Schellenberg (pp. 691–2).

A ruling by US Federal Judge Denise Cote of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, in autumn of last year, is apt since Harris and Merrett called for protection of personal privacy, describing it as a “legitimate interest” deserving protection, and recommending against providing access to government documents about people with disabilities (pp. 680, 686, 691). The judge’s ruling has changed the calculus. It undermines usual claims by the US government that disclosing someone’s security clearance records is not allowed under FOIA or the Privacy Act, and that any disclosure would invade a person’s privacy. Cote’s ruling goes beyond special security clearance given to Elon Musk by making clear that when public figures talk publicly about “sensitive topics,” this might weaken their privacy claims in certain records. Her ruling has raised the standard of justification for why information should be withheld.[30] Her ruling also tilts toward government accountability and public information access and away from restrictions such as security and protection of personal integrity. The latter are present, as Harris and Merrett describe it, in Swedish freedom of information laws (pp. 689–90). Similar restrictions are among the records exempt under FOIA from public disclosure.[31]

The article by Harris and Merrett may seem dated because it was published over thirty years ago, but their conclusions continue to remain relevant to current discourses. For instance, articles in issues of American Archivist in 2024 and 2025 encourage the creation of a new archival ecosystem, making workflows more sustainable and ethical, and redefining community archives, all efforts with the potential to improve the public’s right to know, particularly in relation to government records.[32] Whether the current situation in the US is a permanent shift or something more temporary will be determined by legal and political changes on a national scale. However, it is up to actions by citizens and other professionals, including archivists, to ensure those changes will strengthen and restore democratic norms, rather than reinforce repressive ones. It may involve critically re-examining foundational elements of recordkeeping and drawing lessons to inform present practices based on new realities and circumstances. In the end, Harris and Merrett’s article will remain relevant as long as governments continue to employ secrecy laws to withhold information from the public, weakening the public’s rights and placing participatory democracy at risk.

---

[1]  “What Are Archives?” Society of American Archivists, September 12, 2016, https://www2.archivists.org/about-archives.

[2] “Business Archives in North America: Invest in Your Future, Understand Your Past,” Society of American Archivists, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www2.archivists.org/groups/business-archives-section/business-archives-in-north-america-invest-in-your-future-understand-your-past; Siham Aloui, “Recordkeeping Cultures,” American Archivist 84, no. 2 (2021): 532–6, https://american-archivist.kglmeridian.com/view/journals/aarc/84/2/article-p532.xml?isSearch=true; Phyllisis Ngin, “Recordkeeping Practices of Nurses in Hospitals,” American Archivist 57, no. 4 (1994): 616–30, https://american-archivist.kglmeridian.com/view/journals/aarc/57/4/article-p616.xml?isSearch=true; Lara Wilson, “Archives, Recordkeeping, and Social Justice,” American Archivist 84, no. 2 (2021): 528–31, https://american-archivist.kglmeridian.com/view/journals/aarc/84/2/article-p528.xml?isSearch=true.

[3] Arlette Saenz and David Wright, “Democrats Demand Investigation into Archives Release of Mikie Sherrill’s Unredacted Military Records,” CNN, September 26, 2025, https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/25/politics/national-archives-mikie-sherrill-unredacted-military-records; Kaitlyn McCormick, “Sherrill Decries National Archives Leak of Her Private Info in Military Records,” Courier Post, September 26, 2025, https://www.courierpostonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2025/09/26/national-archives-leak-mikie-sherrill-naval-records-cheating-scandal-ciattarelli-nj-governor-race/86372129007/.

[4] Ry Rivard and Madison Fernandez, “Inspector General to Investigate Rep. Mikie Sherrill Military Records Release,” Politico, September 30, 2025, https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/30/inspector-investigate-sherrill-records-release-00588228; James LaPorta, “Archives Released Too Much of Mikie Sherrill’s Military Record to Ally of Her Opponent in N.J. Governor’s Race,” CBS News, September 26, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/national-archives-mikie-sherrill-military-record-jack-ciattarelli/.

[5] “SAA Core Values Statement and Code of Ethics,” Society of American Archivists, August 2025, https://www2.archivists.org/statements/saa-core-values-statement-and-code-of-ethics.

[6] “SAA Statement on Privacy and Government Records,” Society of American Archivists, October 24, 2025, https://www2.archivists.org/news/2025/saa-statement-on%E2%80%AFprivacy%E2%80%AFand-government-records; “JFK Assassination Records – 2025 Documents Release,” National Archives and Records Administration, June 27, 2025, https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2025; Peter Kornbluh and Arturo Jimenez-Bacardi, “CIA Covert Ops: Kennedy Assassination Records Lift Veil of Secrecy,” National Security Archive, March 19, 2025, https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/2025-03-19/cia-covert-ops-kennedy-assassination-records-lift-veil-secrecy; Brianna Morris-Grant and Hannah Murphy, “The Trump Administration has Released Thousands of Unredacted Files on the JFK Assassination. Here’s What They Tell Us,” ABC News, March 19, 2025, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-19/jfk-assassination-files-released/105071370.

[7] “SAA Condemns Widespread Firing of Archivists and Cultural Heritage Workers,” Society of American Archivists, February 25, 2025, https://www2.archivists.org/news/2025/saa-condemns-widespread-firing-of-archivists-and-cultural-heritage-workers; “SAA Response to AOTUS Removal Urges Advocacy,” Society of American Archivists, February 25, 2025, https://www2.archivists.org/news/2025/saa-response-to-aotus-removal-urges-advocacy; Josh Gerstein and Kyle Cheney, “Trump Fires National Archives Chief,” Politico, February 7, 2025, https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/07/trump-fires-national-archives-chief-00203246; “AHA Sends Letter to White House Regarding Dismissal of US Archivist,” American Historical Association, February 10, 2025, https://www.historians.org/news/aha-sends-letter-to-white-house-regarding-dismissal-of-us-archivist/; Raquel Coronell Uribe, “Trump Dismisses Head of the National Archives,” NBC News, February 7, 2025, https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-dismisses-head-national-archives-colleen-shogan-rcna191309; Jamie Gangel, “White House Forcing Out Top Leadership at National Archives in Major Shakeup,” CNN, February 14, 2025, https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/14/politics/national-archives-leadership-forced-out-trump/index.html; Dan Friedman and David Corn, “National Archives Head Resigns as Trump Takes Control of Records,” Mother Jones, February 14, 2025, https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/02/national-archives-head-resigns-as-trump-takes-control-of-records/.

[8] Drew Friedman, “National Archives to transition out of three federal records centers,” Federal News Network, Jun. 25, 2026, https://federalnewsnetwork.com/facilities-construction/2026/06/national-archives-to-transition-out-of-three-federal-records-centers/; Claire Kluskens, “‘Save Our National Archives’ (SONA) Steps Up in Response to NARA’s Announcement of Plans to Close Two Regional Research Facilities: The National Archives at Chicago and the National Archives at San Francisco (San Bruno),” The Twelve Key, Jun. 30, 2026, https://twelvekey.com/2026/06/30/save-our-national-archives-sona-steps-up-in-response-to-naras-announcement-of-plans-to-close-two-regional-research-facilities-the-national-archives-at-chicago-and-the-national-archives-at-sa/; “Statement on the White House Report, ‘Saving America’s Story’,” Organization of American Historians, Jul. 6, 2026, https://www.oah.org/2026/07/06/statement-on-the-white-house-report-saving-americas-story/.

[9] “SAA Statement on Privacy and Government Records,” Society of American Archivists, October 24, 2025, https://www2.archivists.org/news/2025/saa-statement-on privacy and-government-records; Ali Swenson and Gary Fields, “The National Archives is Nonpartisan but Has Found Itself Targeted by Trump,” Associated Press, February 26, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/trump-national-archives-firings-layoffs-historical-recordkeeping-559027fdd2f634263bea7774a78d66fe; “Trump’s Hostile Takeover of the National Archives — and Our Nation’s History,” American Oversight, March 12, 2025, https://americanoversight.org/investigation/trumps-hostile-takeover-of-the-national-archives-and-our-nations-history/; Lauren Harper, “Hostile Takeover at National Archives Erodes Our Right to Know,” Freedom of the Press Foundation, February 20, 2025, https://freedom.press/the-classifieds/hostile-takeover-at-national-archives-erodes-our-right-to-know/.

[10] Jessica Holden and Ana Roeschley, “Privacy and Access in the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children Records,” American Archivist 83, no. 1 (2020): 77–90, https://american-archivist.kglmeridian.com/view/journals/aarc/83/1/article-p77.xml?isSearch=true; Steven Bingo, “Of Provenance and Privacy: Using Contextual Integrity to Define Third-Party Privacy,” American Archivist 74, no. 2 (2011): 506–21, https://american-archivist.kglmeridian.com/view/journals/aarc/74/2/article-p506.xml?isSearch=true; Alice Robbin, “State Archives and Issues of Personal Privacy: Policies and Practices,” American Archivist 49, no. 2 (1986): 163–75, https://american-archivist.kglmeridian.com/view/journals/aarc/49/2/article-p163.xml?isSearch=true.

[11] “SAA Core Values Statement and Code of Ethics,” Society of American Archivists, August 2025, https://www2.archivists.org/statements/saa-core-values-statement-and-code-of-ethics.

[12] Stephanie Collier and April Anderson-Zorn, “Wikipedia Pages for Underrepresented Archivists: Creating Representation through an SAA Foundation Grant-Funded Documentation Project,” American Archivist 86, no. 2 (2023): 635, https://american-archivist.kglmeridian.com/view/journals/aarc/86/2/article-p632.xml?isSearch=true&body=PDF. This is the only article, presently, in American Archivist which uses the word “doxxing.”

[13] Josh Meyer, “Their Social Security Info Was Revealed in JFK Files. One Plans to Sue,” USA Today, March 20, 2025, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/03/20/jfk-files-social-security-trump/82567111007/; Dave Collins, “People Named in JFK Assassination Documents are Not Happy Their Personal Information was Released,” Associated Press, March 20, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/jfk-assassination-files-personal-information-5609ccd6e106c5b30ee6b6cca3a30e3c; Matthew Gault, “JFK Files Land With a Thud and a Dox,” Gizmodo, March 19, 2025, https://gizmodo.com/jfk-files-land-with-a-thud-and-a-dox-2000578029; Edith Olmsted, “Trump Unleashes Utter Chaos by Releasing JFK Files,” The New Republic, March 20, 2025, https://newrepublic.com/post/192964/donald-trump-release-jfk-files-personal-data.

[14] David Kurtz,  “The Trump Administration’s Absurd Obsession With Secrecy,” Talking Points Memo, July 17, 2025, https://talkingpointsmemo.com/morning-memo/the-trump-administrations-absurd-obsession-with-secrecy; “Beyond the First 100 Days: Combating Trump Administration Secrecy and Abuses of Power,” American Oversight, May 2, 2025, https://americanoversight.org/beyond-the-first-100-days-combating-trump-administration-secrecy-and-abuses-of-power/; Darlene Superville, “Trump Administration Says White House Ballroom Construction Is a Matter of National Security,”  Associated Press, December 15, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/trump-white-house-ballroom-national-security-de9756118bbfca8f40af9cf89db6af5b; Lauren Harper, “Government Secrecy Issues to Watch During Trump’s Presidency,” Freedom of the Press Foundation, January 20, 2025, https://freedom.press/the-classifieds/government-secrecy-issues-to-watch-during-trumps-presidency/; “Secrecy,” American Civil Liberties Union, accessed December 18, 2025, https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/secrecy; Elizabeth Goitein, “The U.S. Government’s Secrecy Problem Just Got Worse,” Brennan Center for Justice, October 17, 2013, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/us-governments-secrecy-problem-just-got-worse; Kaeten Mistry, “‘Signalgate’: How the US Government Creates and Guards its Secrets,” The Conversation, April 4, 2025, https://theconversation.com/signalgate-how-the-us-government-creates-and-guards-its-secrets-253569; Sam Lebovic, “The Surprisingly Short History of American Secrecy,” American Historical Association, July 5, 2016, https://www.historians.org/perspectives-article/the-surprisingly-short-history-of-american-secrecy-september-2016/.

[15] Lauren Harper, “FPF Sues Justice Department Over Qatari Plane Secrecy,” Freedom of the Press Foundation, July 28, 2025, https://freedom.press/the-classifieds/fpf-sues-justice-department-over-qatari-plane-secrecy/.

[16] Lauren Harper, “We Sued the Government Over Excessive Secrecy Three Times This Week,” Freedom of the Press Foundation, September 28, 2025, https://freedom.press/the-classifieds/we-sued-the-government-over-excessive-secrecy-three-times-this-week/.

[17] Angela Fu, “Tear Gas, Fear and Federal Secrecy: How Chicago Journalists Are Covering Trump’s Immigration Policies While Living Through Them,” Poynter, October 22, 2025, https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2025/chicago-ice-raid-apartment-journalists-immigration-trump/. A related article, entitled “Secrecy of Immigration Control Actions is Frighteningly Un-American,” https://ncnewsline.com/2025/06/13/secrecy-of-immigration-control-actions-is-frighteningly-un-american/, was published in NC Newsline.

[18] “A People’s Archive of Police Violence,” Center for the Preservation of Civil Rights Sites, accessed November 17, 2025, https://cpcrs.upenn.edu/resource/peoples-archive-police-violence; “About,” A People’s Archive of Police Violence, accessed November 17, 2025, https://peoplesarchiveofstateviolence.com/?page_id=1013; “About Us,” Immigrant Archive Project, accessed November 17, 2025, https://web.archive.org/web/20251207121849/https://immigrantarchiveproject.org/about-us/; “The Archive of Immigrant Voices,” Center for Global Migration Studies, accessed November 17, 2025, https://archiveofimmigrantvoices.omeka.net/.

[19] Vivian Chen, “A Comprehensive Analysis of ICE Arrest Data from Deportation Data Project,” VisaVerge, June 28, 2025, https://www.visaverge.com/immigration/a-comprehensive-analysis-of-ice-arrest-data-from-deportation-data-project/; Pedro Camacho, “ICE Agents Lose Access to Database Tracking Immigrants’ Wire Transfers: Report,” International Business Times, September 15, 2025, https://www.ibtimes.com/ice-agents-lose-access-database-tracking-immigrants-wire-transfers-report-3783386.

[20] Taija PerryCook, “Investigation Found Two-thirds of More Than 1,800 Detainees ‘Dropped off the Grid’ from ‘Alligator Alcatraz’?” Snopes, September 25, 2025, https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/09/25/men-lost-from-alligator-alcatraz/; Chuck Goudie, Lisa Capitanini, Katy Smyser, and Nathan Halder, “Could ICE Have ‘Lost’ 3,000 Immigrant Arrestees in Chicago?,  NBC 5, October 27, 2025, https://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/could-ice-have-lost-3000-immigrant-arrestees-in-chicago/3844220/.

[21] William Fischer, “[Destruction of Legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service Records],” National Archives and Records Administration, April 21, 2025, https://www.archives.gov/files/records-mgmt/resources/ud-2025-0020-dhs-uscis-close.pdf; “Unauthorized Disposition of Federal Records,” National Archives and Records Administration, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/resources/unauthorizeddispositionoffederalrecords; “[Inquiry about Destruction of Immigration of Naturalization Service Records],” National Archives and Records Administration, January 14, 2025, https://www.archives.gov/files/records-mgmt/resources/ud-2025-0020-dhs-uscis-open.pdf.

[22] American Civil Liberties Union, et al., “Re: Request for Withdrawal and Reevaluation of DHS Records Schedules Authorizing Destruction of Records of Abuse, Neglect, and Misconduct,” American Immigration Council, May 3, 2021, https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/letter_dhs_records_schedules_authorizing_destruction_of_records_0.pdf.

[23] “Judge Stops ICE from Destroying Records of Abuse,” Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, March 12, 2021, https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/press-releases/ice-records-destruction-victory/; “AHA Signs On to Letter Opposing DHS Records Schedules,” American Historical Association, May 3, 2021, https://www.historians.org/news/aha-signs-on-to-letter-opposing-dhs-records-schedules/.

[24] “…Our Organisation,” South African Society of Archivists, accessed November 17, 2025, https://saarchivist.co.za/our-organisation/; “SAA Core Values Statement and Code of Ethics,” Society of American Archivists, August 2025, https://www2.archivists.org/statements/saa-core-values-statement-and-code-of-ethics.

[25] Rachel Santarsiero, “Disappearing Data, Part II: Distorted Science and Deregulation,” National Security Archive, September 30, 2025, https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/climate-change-transparency-project/2025-09-30/disappearing-data-part-ii-distorted; Emma Slusher, “Disaster Struck in Texas While Climate Data Disappears,” Unredacted, The National Security Archive Blog, August 22, 2025, https://unredacted.com/2025/08/22/disaster-struck-in-texas-while-climate-data-disappears/; Rachel Santarsiero, “EPA Refuses to Disclose Talking Points for Meeting with Fossil Fuel Advocates,” National Security Archive, August 4, 2025, https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/climate-change-transparency-project/2025-08-04/epa-refuses-disclose-talking-points.

[26] “DON’T SHRED ON ME!: USAID Documents Destruction Breaks the Law, According to National Security Archive,” National Security Archive, March 12, 2025, https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/news/2025-03-12/dont-shred-me-usaid-documents-destruction-breaks-law-according-national-security; Rachel Santarsiero, “Disappearing Data: Trump Administration Removing Climate Information from Government Websites,” National Security Archive, February 6, 2025, https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/climate-change-transparency-project-foia/2025-02-06/disappearing-data-trump; Lindsay Whitehurst and John Hanna, “Judges Don’t Intervene After Trump Administration Says It’s Stopped Destroying USAID Records,” Associated Press, March 14, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/usaid-classified-documents-shredding-burning-trump-administration-57a0dbcbf73535822e07a32c893eecdf.

[27] Makutla Mojapelo, “Let the People Know, and the Country Will Be Safe: FOI Models in South Africa and Zimbabwe,” Records Management Journal 34, no. 1 (2024): 5, https://www.emerald.com/rmj/article-pdf/34/1/1/9482646/rmj-01-2023-0003.pdf.

[28] Forget Chaterera, “A Framework for Access and Use of Documents Heritage at the National Archives of Zimbabwe,” University of South Africa (South Africa, 2017) ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, p. 65, https://www.proquest.com/docview/3224595700?fromopenview=true&pq-origsite=gscholar&sourcetype=Dissertations & Theses.

[29] Alice Herman, “Government Transparency Expert David Cuillier on ICE ‘Cloak of Secrecy’,” Suncoast Searchlight, October 17, 2025, https://suncoastsearchlight.org/david-cuillier-ice-brechner-transparency/.

[30] Lindy Kyzer, “Security Clearance Secrecy Faces New Scrutiny After Elon Musk Disclosures,” Government Executive, October 14, 2025, https://www.govexec.com/management/2025/10/elon-musks-security-clearance-drama-could-change-what-private-and-what-not/408758/; Robert McCoy, “The New York Times Wins Right to Obtain Info Musk Wanted Kept Private,” The New Republic, October 8, 2025, https://newrepublic.com/post/201500/new-york-times-elon-musk-government-clearances; Sarah Rumpf, “Judge Grants NYT’s Demand for List of Elon Musk’s Security Clearances, Citing His Own Public Admissions,” Mediaite, October 8, 2025, https://www.mediaite.com/lawcrime/judge-grants-nyts-demand-for-list-of-elon-musks-security-clearances-citing-his-own-public-admissions/.

[31] “FAQ,” FOIA.gov, United States Department of Justice, accessed December 18, 2025, https://www.foia.gov/faq.html. See the nine exemptions listed as responses to the question “What are FOIA exemptions?”

[32] Sony Prosper, “Conceptualizing Records: Community Archives Describing Themselves,” American Archivist, 87, no. 1 (2024): 19–48, https://american-archivist.kglmeridian.com/view/journals/aarc/87/1/article-p19.xml; Wendy Duff, Jessica Ho, Christa Sato, Henria Aton, Peter Deziak, and Cheryl Regehr, “Redefining Archival Reference: Relationship-based Reference,” American Archivist 87, no. 1 (2024): 107–30, https://american-archivist.kglmeridian.com/view/journals/aarc/87/1/article-p107.xml; Alexandra deGraffenreid, “Engaged the Space Between Minimal Processing and Inclusive Description to Create More Sustainable and Ethical Workflows,” American Archivist 87, no. 2 (2024): 279–301, https://american-archivist.kglmeridian.com/view/journals/aarc/87/2/article-p279.xml.