The Superior Court of Delaware recently ruled in favor of three school districts, dismissing a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Delaware regarding Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) fees. The court's decision, issued on July 21, 2026, affects how public records requests are handled in the state, particularly concerning the fees that can be charged for processing such requests.
The ACLU Delaware had filed a complaint against Louann Hudson, Marilyn Moore, and Kylie Cross, the FOIA Coordinators for the Cape Henlopen, Christina, and Woodbridge School Districts, respectively. The ACLU argued that the administrative fees assessed by these districts were unreasonably high and served as a barrier to accessing public information. This case highlights the ongoing tension between public access to information and the costs associated with obtaining it.
In October 2025, the ACLU submitted FOIA requests to the three school districts, seeking information on educational opportunities and outcomes for English Language Learning students. While fourteen districts responded, Cape Henlopen, Christina, and Woodbridge estimated fees of $1,900 or more, with Cape Henlopen estimating costs as high as $3,438.05. The ACLU claimed these fees were excessive and sought a court order to declare them unreasonable, prevent the districts from charging them, and compel the release of the requested documents.
The case reached the Superior Court after the defendants filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the ACLU had not exhausted administrative remedies. Specifically, they contended that the ACLU should have first petitioned the Delaware Attorney General before filing a lawsuit. The court agreed, ruling that the ACLU’s complaint was improperly filed.
The court's ruling emphasized the importance of following the proper administrative process outlined in Delaware's FOIA statute. Judge Sean P. Lugg stated, "Delaware’s FOIA provides a clear administrative path to enforce alleged violations of its terms. ACLU Delaware must petition the Attorney General under 29 Del. C. § 10005(e) and follow the administrative process dictated by that statute before presenting a claim to this Court." This highlights the court's stance that the Attorney General is best suited to address issues regarding the reasonableness of fees.
The court's decision reinforces the need for individuals and organizations to utilize the administrative channels available to them before seeking judicial intervention. This ruling could have significant implications for future FOIA requests in Delaware, as it clarifies the process that must be followed when disputing fees charged by public bodies.
Moving forward, this ruling may influence how public bodies in Delaware handle FOIA requests and the fees associated with them. It underscores the necessity for transparency while also recognizing the administrative costs involved in processing such requests. The decision could deter similar lawsuits in the future, as potential plaintiffs may be more cautious about bypassing administrative remedies.
As for the ACLU, they may still pursue their claims by following the proper administrative process as outlined by the court. This includes petitioning the Attorney General regarding the alleged unreasonable fees. The ruling does not prevent the ACLU from seeking the information they originally requested; it simply requires them to adhere to the established procedures.
In conclusion, the dismissal of the ACLU's case serves as a reminder of the importance of following legal processes when seeking public information. The court's ruling reinforces the administrative framework designed to facilitate access to public records while balancing the need for reasonable fees. This case will likely serve as a reference point for future disputes involving FOIA requests and administrative fees in Delaware.