skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: To preserve, release, and litigate: Dimensions of executive branch transparency
Abstract Transparency is essential for public awareness of government activity and in holding officials accountable for their behavior and decisions. However, executives understandably have a desire to maintain autonomy over the flow of information outside of the executive branch, which can sometimes lead to a clash between government openness and executive control over information. This article investigates executive branch transparency along two specific dimensions: threats to the preservation of government information, and the judicial monitoring of executive branch transparency. Federal law directs executive branch actors to preserve government information. Statutes and regulations detail governing policies as well as guidelines that apply to every presidential administration. However, we consider each rule and recommendation through the lens of the Trump administration to gain greater clarity and precision. The Trump administration proves a useful focus for our empirical analysis because of its recency as well as multiple reports of its improper handling and preservation of records. We lay out and develop a typology of threats to record preservation. Preservation conflicts have emerged across multiple presidential administrations and have become increasingly common and visible. Judicial monitoring of executive branch transparency has become a crucial tool to address the withholding of records. We show that federal judges can play a vital role in defining the boundaries of government transparency through their decisions in Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation. The U.S. Department of Justice oversees and often leads the government's defense against FOIA actions. We find that federal judges are most likely to require executive branch responsiveness and disclosure when the judges' underlying policy preferences are most distant from that of the administration. Our findings should inform reforms to protect government transparency.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2245369
PAR ID:
10488363
Author(s) / Creator(s):
;
Editor(s):
Douglas Kriner
Publisher / Repository:
Presidential Studies Quarterly
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Presidential Studies Quarterly
Volume:
53
Issue:
2
ISSN:
0360-4918
Page Range / eLocation ID:
209 to 233
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin)
    On August 13-14, 2025, the Jackson School of Geoscience hosted the inaugural North American Workshop on Critical Mineral Research, Development and Education, in the Thompson Conference Center on the campus of the University of Texas at Austin, USA. The workshop was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and was attended by 230 participants. 176 participants attended the workshop in-person while another 54 participants attended online via Zoom. Twenty-two participants (including 10 students and 7 early career researchers) received travel support through the NSF grant to attend the workshop in Austin. Out of the 230 workshop participants, 134 participants were from academia (34 students), 66 from the private sector and 30 from federal- and state-level government agencies. The workshop was divided into four topical sessions that discussed current issues in critical minerals research, development, and education: (A) Conventional and Unconventional Sources of Critical Minerals. (B) How to grow the U.S. critical minerals workforce. (C) Innovations in Critical Mineral Extraction and Recycling. (D) Policy and Supply Chain Economics. The topical sessions were composed of two keynote lectures and complemented by oral and poster presentations by the workshop participants. A panel discussion and breakout session explored recent developments in critical minerals research, development and education in the U.S., with particular focus on the implications of recent Presidential Executive Orders. The discussions highlighted, for example, that: (i) The recent critical mineral-related Presidential Executive Orders by the Trump-Vance administration are encouraging steps towards fast-tracking US-based critical mineral production. (ii) Lengthy permitting timelines and limited transparency in the decision-making process – with often unpredictable outcomes – remain major barriers for mining and mineral processing operations in the U.S. Workshop participants suggested the development of policies specifically aimed at streamlining permitting processes. (iii) Funding initiatives are too often aimed at increasing short-to-mid-term critical mineral production while generation of ‘pre-competitive data’ to support and guide mineral exploration is largely neglected. Workshop participants recommended that future funding cycles place greater emphasis on generating fundamental geoscience data and insight that can be leveraged by the private sector for green and brownfield exploration. (iv) The persistent negative image of the mining and mineral processing sector remains a major obstacle to attracting and developing a skilled critical minerals workforce. As possible starting points for long-term solutions, workshop participants suggested launching a media campaign, implementing industry-led K-12 outreach programs, and stronger and closer collaborations between academia and the private sector through student-centered research projects. 
    more » « less
  2. (, American Behavioral Scientist)
    Over the past two decades, the U.S. federal government has sought to increase its capacity to find, apprehend, and deport noncitizens residing in the United States who have violated federal immigration laws. One way the federal government has done this is by partnering with state and local law enforcement agencies on immigration enforcement efforts. The present study analyzes the records of all 1,964,756 interior removals between fiscal years 2003 and 2015 to examine how, if at all, the types of criminal convictions leading to removal from the U.S. interior have changed during this period of heightened coordination between law enforcement agencies and whether there are differences by gender and region of origin in the types of convictions leading to removal. Findings show that as coordination between law enforcement agencies intensified, the proportion of individuals removed from the U.S. interior with either no criminal convictions or with a driving-related conviction as their most serious conviction increased. Findings also show that the proportion of individuals removed with no criminal convictions was greater for women than for men and that the share of individuals removed with a driving-related conviction as their most serious conviction was greater for Latin Americans than for individuals from all other regions. Given renewed investment in these types of law enforcement partnerships under the Trump administration, the patterns presented in this article may foreshadow trends to come. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al (, Northwestern University Law Review)
    Federal court records have been available online for nearly a quarter century, yet they remain frustratingly inaccessible to the public. This is due to two primary barriers: (1) the federal government's prohibitively high fees to access the records at scale and (2) the unwieldy state of the records themselves, which are mostly text documents scattered across numerous systems. Official datasets produced by the judiciary, as well as third-party data collection efforts, are incomplete, inaccurate, and similarly inaccessible to the public. The result is a de facto data blackout that leaves an entire branch of the federal government shielded from empirical scrutiny. In this Essay, we introduce the SCALES project: a new data-gathering and data-organizing initiative to right this wrong. SCALES is an online platform that we built to assemble federal court records, systematically organize them and extract key information, and-most importantly-make them freely available to the public. The database currently covers all federal cases initiated in 2016 and 2017, and we intend to expand this coverage to all years. This Essay explains the shortcomings of existing systems (such as the federal government's PACER platform), how we built SCALES to overcome these inadequacies, and how anyone can use SCALES to empirically analyze the operations of the federal courts. We offer a series of exploratory findings to showcase the depth and breadth of the SCALES platform. Our goal is for SCALES to serve as a public resource where practitioners, policymakers, and scholars can conduct empirical legal research and improve the operations of the federal courts. For more information, visit www.scales-okn.org. 
    more » « less
  4. ; (, Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics)
    US national expert advisory bodies related to science, technology, and innovation (STI) policy have a wide range of missions, governing structures, operational practices, cultures, and impact on federal policymaking. This paper offers an analytical framework for assessing the autonomy, function, and influence of of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), a federal advisory committee consisting of 30 elite scientists, engineers, and industry leaders appointed by and advising the president. We demonstrate that PCAST carries both a strong instrumental advisory role, providing substantive advice to White House STI policy development, and a significant symbolic advisory role, offering visible public support to presidential decisions and initiatives related to STI. However, we find that the council's engagement with either or both roles has shifted depending on its available resources, the policy agenda of the administration it serves, the level of presidential attention, and the priorities of council leadership. The paper concludes with recommendations to guide future PCASTs in fulfilling their mission and appropriately influencing US national STI policy. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; (, Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World)
    The authors examine how people interpret expert claims when they do not share experts’ technical understanding. The authors review sociological research on the cultural boundaries of science and expertise, which suggests that scientific disciplines are heuristics nonspecialists use to evaluate experts’ credibility. To test this idea, the authors examine judicial decisions about contested expert evidence in U.S. district courts ( n = 575). Multinomial logistic regression results show that judges favor evidence from natural scientists compared with social scientists, even after adjusting for other differences among experts, judges, and court cases. Judges also favor evidence from medical and health experts compared with social scientists. These results help illustrate the assumptions held by judges about the credibility of some disciplines relative to others. They also suggest that judges may rely on tacit assumptions about the merits of different areas of science, which may reflect broadly shared cultural beliefs about expertise and credibility. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email