6 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 28 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Schoenman v. Federal Bureau of Investigation.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Schoenman v. Federal Bureau of Investigation Anchor | green | “any reasonably segregable portions” | 6 |
| 2 | Pacific Fisheries, Inc. v. United States | green | “offering an affidavit with reasonably detailed descriptions of the withheld portions of the documents and alleging facts sufficient to establish an exemption.” | 5 |
| 3 | Sanders v. Obama | green | “so long as the declaration is reasonably detailed and not controverted by contrary evidence or evidence of bad faith.” | 5 |
| 4 | Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics v. National Archives & Records Administration | green | “search methods, locations of specific files searched, descriptions of searches of all files likely to contain responsive documents, and names of agency personnel conducting the search are considered sufficient.” | 5 |
| 5 | Jones v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission | green | “on complaint, the district court of the united states in the district in which the complainant resides, or has his principal place of business, or in which the agency records are situated, or in the district of columbia, has jurisdiction to enjoin the agency from withholding age…” | 4 |
| 6 | James Madison Project v. Department of Justice | green | “a relatively detailed justification through the submission of an index of documents, known as a vaughn index, sufficiently detailed affidavits or declarations, or both.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.