A look inside the relentless mind of the FOIA reporter whom US government agencies fear most

Forcing government agencies to reveal their secrets is how Jason Leopold has spent his career. A senior investigative reporter at Bloomberg, he has filed more than 13,000 public records requests in the United States over two decades. Previously, he reported at BuzzFeed News, VICE News, The Guardian, and Truthout, a US independent nonprofit news organisation focused on investigative reporting and social justice.

Leopold is one of the most relentless Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) reporters in the US, having earned a set of backhanded nicknames: ‘FOIA terrorist’ from a federal agency, ‘FOIA posse’ from the Department of Justice, and from the National Security Agency, an accusation of ‘weaponising the FOIA’. 

Laws concerning freedom of information, sometimes called ‘right to information’, exist in numerous countries around the world. While it’s important to be familiar with your country’s relevant statute, freedom of information laws tend to share the principle that a citizen can ask public authorities to share a specific piece of information they hold and, barring some exceptions, these institutions should grant it to them. Former Reuters Institute Journalism Fellow Tarjei Leer-Salvesen mapped such laws across the globe in his 2023 project.

Leopold’s freedom of information reporting has forced into public view everything from thousands of pages on the CIA’s post-9/11 torture program to Vladimir Putin’s assassination targets, a record he pursued for eight years. Perhaps most famously, it was Leopold who compelled the release of Hillary Clinton’s emails, a request originally aimed at examining how she handled foreign policy and human rights issues.

In a 2015 investigation for VICE News, he revealed the CIA’s behind-the-scenes role in shaping the film Zero Dark Thirty, exposing ethically fraught interactions with Hollywood. He also forced the release of a declassified Department of Defense inspector-general report detailing how some detainees were interrogated while under psychotropic medication or “chemical restraints,” raising ethical questions about medical coercion in U.S. detention facilities.

In a 2019 investigation, he revealed documents showing that the Secret Service opened an inquiry into Eminem after the rapper released lyrics deemed threatening toward Donald and Ivanka Trump. When comedian John Mulaney joked on Saturday Night Live about a ‘Caesar-style’ assassination, Leopold’s FOIA request similarly revealed that the Secret Service assessed the joke as a potential threat.

In 2023, he helped expose a once-secret, 190-page FBI counterintelligence inquiry into Ivana Trump’s emigration from Czechoslovakia; in 2024, he uncovered internal USAID records detailing child-labour abuses and social media threats tied to groups receiving U.S. taxpayer funding. 

Leopold believes the law is underused, especially by ordinary citizens, and that transparency is a form of democratic participation. He explores this in his weekly FOIA Files newsletter and podcast Disclosure, where he digs into the wild backstories behind his FOIA requests, the lawsuits they sparked, and the document dumps that made them worth it. He brings audiences into what he calls the “culture of secrecy,” chronicling the strategies, delays, denials, and occasional victories that define his work. His commitment has made him both a model for investigative reporters and a headache for officials.

In this Q&A, Leopold reflects on the craft he has spent years refining and offers advice for reporters wishing to pursue public records requests. Our conversation has been lightly edited for clarity and length.

Q. Was there an early FOIA experience that shaped your approach?

A. My first real lesson in the power of FOIA came from a set of documents someone else had obtained. They revealed how the U.S. Air Force trained nuclear missile officers on the morals and ethics of launching nuclear weapons. What shocked me was the material they used: a mix of religious teachings and the writings of a former Nazi SS officer, who later became the father of the modern U.S. space program, presented as a kind of moral guide.

I turned those documents into my first published story using FOIA material about 15 years ago. The impact was immediate: following our report, the Air Force suspended its training program. That showed me the power of documents and led me on this very aggressive path of filing FOIA requests with all government agencies. It became addictive. I wanted to use this tool to pry loose government secrets and tell stories in the public interest. Over time, I learned that you could even sue the government to compel the release of records, which opened up an entirely new level of accountability. At a time when national security was often used to justify secrecy, FOIA became my way of challenging that and forcing transparency.

Q. How do you reverse engineer which agency or office is the right custodian of the records you need?

A. When I approach filing a FOIA request, I do a tremendous amount of research upfront. As an investigative reporter, I’m always asking about documents and trying to find out as much as I can. That means speaking to current and former government officials.

What I’m looking for are the agencies that would have the records I’m interested in, because sometimes it’s more than one. On the front end, it’s an incredible amount of research and reporting. I don’t approach FOIA as just firing off a request and hoping there may be something there.

Because I’ve done this for such a long time, I’m pretty much aware of what those agencies are. I’ve learned how agencies function and how government functions. So it becomes almost an immediate reaction to the topic -- just knowing where to go.

Q. Can you give me an example of how long a typical FOIA request is?

A. Essentially, what that request contains is alerting or instructing the agency that I’m requesting records under the Freedom of Information Act and citing the statute. I include the specific records I’m seeking, and I advise them that they’re supposed to err on the side of disclosure. If they decide to withhold records, they have to provide a reason.

I sometimes tell them where to search, because I know the record-keeping systems that exist. I include language on a fee waiver -- meaning I’m a journalist, I’m requesting these records because they’re in the public interest, I intend to write about them, and the agency should waive any fees. Then I provide background on who I am as a journalist.

If I’m asking for a long list of records, it can get longer, but the standard is about 3 pages. You want the agency to know exactly what you’re looking for. You do not want to just fire off a request and say, “Give me all the emails.” You want to provide as much detail as possible -- who the recipients are, who the sender is, the subject matter, the dates -- so it’s easier for the FOIA officers to search.

Q. You do a lot of follow-ups and appeals. How do you decide when to keep pushing an agency and when to move on?

A. I never move on. I always push them, and I will always appeal. Agencies sometimes make mistakes, misinterpret the law, or their rationale for denying records is incorrect. Appeals are a very important part of the process.

I’m always pushing back because agencies aren’t necessarily open in the sense of just giving you everything you’ve asked for. They’ll often withhold a lot of information. So it’s important to understand the law so you can empower yourself in that pushback -- understanding how FOIA works and what recourse you have to further compel the release of records.

Q. What are some ways agencies try to discourage requesters instead of just releasing documents?

A. Fees are a big way agencies try to thwart requesters. They’ll say, “This is going to cost thousands of dollars.” But usually that's because the request is too broad -- maybe asking for five years' worth of records when you only need a specific subset. The requests aren’t narrow and targeted.

Here’s what I’ve learned: when you ask for emails, always tell the agency to omit news clippings, press releases, and listserv messages [emails circulated through a group mailing list used by government agencies for internal communication]. When an agency says they have 2,000 or 3,000 pages, the vast majority are going to be those things -- stuff you don’t actually want.

Narrow the timeframe. That reduces the scope, gets you exactly what you want, and reduces fees. I also push back and ask for a breakdown of costs, then research the law around fees to see if they’re justified -- because often they’re not.

Here’s the key thing: oftentimes, the agency hasn’t actually searched yet. They’ve just done a keyword search and seen all the hits, but they haven't looked at the actual records. That's why it’s so important to do research on the front end and understand exactly what you’re looking for. Avoid fishing expeditions.

Q. What’s the biggest cache of documents you’ve ever received from a FOIA request?

A. The biggest would probably be Hillary Clinton’s emails. I was the journalist who forced their release -- tens of thousands of pages.

When I filed that request, she was running for president, and my goal was to inform the public about how the nation’s top diplomat would perform as president. I wanted to show how she handled matters of human rights, foreign policy, LGBTQ issues, and diplomacy.

I had no idea at the time that she was using a private server. But once that was revealed, the fact that she wasn’t always communicating on official government email became a scandal that overshadowed my original goal of informing the public about her policy work. But I did get more than 30,000 pages of emails.

That taught me an important lesson: records can be weaponised for different purposes. It’s something I keep very much in the front of my mind when I’m requesting records, and it’s crucial to understand what the impact of those records can be.

Q. When you receive documents, how do you organise, analyse, and identify the most newsworthy elements? 

A. I start by sitting with the documents and reading them page by page. Having done this for more than 20 years, my eye is trained to spot what matters. When an agency withholds or redacts records and cites a FOIA exemption, I often get a sense of what they’re hiding. I read subject lines, compare them with what’s publicly known, and try to piece things together.

One moment that stands out for me was in 2017. I received a heavily redacted set of FBI documents and was able to unredact parts just by reporting and following a single zip code. That small detail helped me figure out what was behind the redactions. It was a moment where I realised that all the skills I’d honed over the years -- filing FOIA requests, appealing denials, analysing documents -- really came together.

So, back to your question: I read documents carefully, sometimes combine them with sources to understand context, and continue reporting beyond the papers themselves. AI and large language models can help analyse voluminous records, but I still prefer to read every page to ensure nothing is missed.

Finding a newsworthy nugget, especially in heavily redacted files, comes down to deeply understanding the subject matter and identifying the right people to speak with. The documents are only the first step; the story emerges from careful analysis and persistent reporting.

Q. Is there a typical timeline?

A. Here’s how it’s supposed to work: [in the US] on the federal level, agencies have to respond within 20 business days. Technically, the way the law is written, they’re supposed to provide documents at that time, but they never do. Because FOIA is so widely used now, agencies have massive backlogs.

There’s no set time for when you can expect to receive records. You may receive them within a day, depending on the request, or it may take many years. In the case of Vladimir Putin's assassination targets, it took over eight years. Why? I don’t have an answer -- the agency didn’t disclose that. The CIA torture program records also took a lengthy time because they dealt with classified material. It’s a very slow process.

That’s why I always tell editors and reporters interested in FOIA: it’s a long game. Different states have different public records laws, so timelines vary at the state level, too. But whether federal or state, patience and persistence are essential.

Q. What institutional support do journalists need from their newsrooms to do sustained FOIA work, and what can editors and newsroom leaders do to build that culture of persistence?

A. First, having great newsroom lawyers is crucial. For example, the newsroom counsel at Bloomberg has been incredibly supportive, both for my work and for other reporters pursuing records.

Editors need to understand that FOIA is a long game. The information it reveals can be impactful -- it can lead to accountability, give a voice to the voiceless, and shed light on dark places. But there’s no mechanism to force records to be released immediately. Even when the records arrive years later, they can still be highly newsworthy and valuable for reporting.

Newsrooms should implement robust FOIA programs and consistently file requests. Doing so not only builds a pipeline of stories but also helps restore public trust. Studies show trust in journalism has eroded, and one way to improve credibility is by obtaining documents, sharing them with readers, and explaining what they mean. Bringing the public into the reporting process strengthens transparency and trust.

Governments are increasingly secretive, so it’s vital to keep the public informed about how their taxpayer dollars are being spent and what government agencies are up to. Regular FOIA work, combined with strong editorial support, is key to building a culture of persistence and accountability.

Q. In many countries, access to information laws exist but are rarely enforced. What universal principles or creative workarounds could help journalists in such environments pursue transparency reporting effectively?

A. First, really understand the law. This is crucial for pushing back against an agency when they ignore you, claim they don’t have records, or conduct a poor search. Empower yourself with that knowledge so you can effectively challenge them.

Second, continuously appeal if that mechanism exists in your country. File requests regularly. Here’s the thing -- and this is not the way it’s supposed to work, but sometimes it does -- an agency that doesn’t see a reporter filing regularly feels like that reporter can be ignored. Stay on top of agencies.

Third, sometimes it’s important to take it to the next level: filing a lawsuit to compel the release of records. Let FOIA officers know they violate the law by not releasing records. Hold them accountable.

Here's what I’ve seen in my years of doing this: when an agency ignores a requester, the requester gets frustrated and says, “This is a waste of my time,”  without actually pushing back. Call the agency. Ask: “When can I expect the release of records? Have you searched? Have you found responsive records?”

Be persistent. 

Q. What gives you hope, and what worries you most about the future of open records?

A. What gives me hope is knowing how impactful FOIA is and can be. Despite the shortcomings and hurdles you have to jump over to gain access to records, I’m still getting records. I still see journalists and the public filing requests.

Requests for records have skyrocketed, not waned. That means there’s increasing pressure on agencies to comply. People continue to be aggressive in trying to obtain documents, and that gives me hope. It's that kind of pressure and persistence that makes the difference.

Getting a set of records and seeing what they reveal keeps me going. Even with everything a requester has to overcome, when you get that package in the mail or your email inbox, it’s amazing. It’s like Christmas.