Supreme Court skeptical of paper’s argument over food stamp data | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World

Supreme Court skeptical of paper’s argument over food stamp data

Associated Press
1059117_web1_1059117-528cd9f970554b37935fe65629bb7ddb

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday seemed inclined to rule against a South Dakota newspaper seeking data about the government’s food assistance program, previously known as food stamps.

The high court was hearing arguments in a case originally brought by the Argus Leader newspaper, which is owned by USA Today publisher Gannett and is the largest newspaper in South Dakota. The paper wants to know how much money goes annually to each store that participates in the government’s $65 billion-a-year Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

The Argus Leader says the data is public and shows citizens how the government is spending their tax money. A supermarket trade association opposing the information’s release argues it is confidential.

At arguments, both conservative and liberal justices suggested skepticism about the Argus Leader’s contention on the meaning of the word “confidential.”

As a result, the newspaper’s best hope of winning may rest on a question about the group that brought the case to the high court, the Food Marketing Institute, a supermarket trade association. Justice Sonia Sotomayor suggested that the group didn’t have the right to pursue the case.

The issue she raised has to do with the fact that the Argus Leader’s request for information was made to the U.S. government, and it was the government that initially blocked the information’s release and defended that decision in court. But after a court ruled against the government, it said it would not pursue the case further and would instead release the information.

At that point, the Virginia-based Food Marketing Institute stepped in to continue the fight. Sotomayor indicated that was an issue.

“The government chose not to appeal. It chose … to turn it over. Why aren’t you bound by that decision?” Sotomayor asked Food Marketing Institute lawyer Evan Young.

The Trump administration is backing the group in arguing against the information’s release. The Associated Press is among dozens of media organizations that have signed a legal brief supporting the Argus Leader.

Categories: News | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.