In an opinion issued on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer said, "the government has applied the exemptions broadly and without providing a detailed explanation of why the withheld material is exempt." Judge Breyer ordered the FBI and the Transportation Security Administration "to review all withheld information" and "to prove that an exemption applies and that exemptions are to be construed narrowly."

"This decision is significant because the Court rejected the federal government's sweeping contention that information having to do with the government's screening of airline passengers after September 11th is off limits. The Court agreed that many of the documents that the government is withholding simply cannot be kept secret," said Thomas R. Burke, of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP in San Francisco, an ACLU cooperating attorney.

In November 2002, the ACLU of Northern California filed a Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act request on behalf of two local anti-war activists, Rebecca Gordon and Jan Adams, who were told by airline agents at San Francisco International Airport that their names appeared on a secret no-fly list. When the government failed to respond, the ACLU filed a lawsuit in April 2003 and obtained 94 pages of documents that failed to answer basic questions about the no-fly list, including how names are selected for the list.

In addition, the documents failed to answer another crucial question: whether Americans are being singled out on the list based solely on their First Amendment-protected activity. The documents also raised serious questions about how well the list is being managed, by whom, and whether it contains clear constraints and mission limitations to ensure that it does not violate Americans' basic freedoms.

The disclosures are also silent on how Americans can get their names off the list and whether the FBI tracks "no fly" list matches.

"When potentially thousands of innocent travelers are being subjected to unwarranted searches and detentions because of the government list, the public should be able to understand and meaningfully deliberate on whether the lists improve security or are just a waste of government resources," said Thomas R. Burke.