1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Government Assertion of State Secrets Privilege in Private Party Litigation

Government Assertion of State Secrets Privilege in Private Party Litigation

Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.06.17

In a rare move, the Department of Justice intervened in Wever v. AECOM National Security Programs, Inc., asserting the state secrets privilege and requesting the dismissal of a $69 million dollar lawsuit between two private parties that it contends would risk the exposure of classified information if the suit were allowed to proceed. Although the Government was not an original party to the litigation, the Government argued in its Motion for Summary Judgment that the court is required to dismiss the case under the state secrets privilege because the Government, through the head of the department with control over the matter, after extensive consultation and coordination within and among relevant Executive Branch agencies, formally asserted the privilege and all three of the circumstances justifying dismissal exist: (1) the plaintiff cannot prove his or her claim without privileged evidence; (2) the defendants cannot properly defend the case without privileged evidence; and (3) further litigation would present an unjustifiable risk of disclosure.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 08.21.26

FTC Proposes Enforcement Policy Statement on Personalized Pricing: What Businesses Need to Know

On August 19, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a proposed Enforcement Policy Statement on personalized pricing — the practice of companies using consumers’ personal data to set individualized prices, discounts, coupons, or other incentives. The proposed statement, which is open for public comment for 30 days following publication in the Federal Register, marks a major step up in the FTC’s focus on data-driven pricing strategies and puts businesses across industries on notice that undisclosed or inadequately disclosed personalized pricing will not be tolerated. Importantly, while the proposed statement is not a binding legal requirement and does not create new legal obligations, it serves as an enforcement warning that the FTC is prepared to use its existing enforcement authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act (Section 5) and is also a potential harbinger of rulemaking. Businesses that engage in — or are considering — personalized pricing should carefully assess their disclosure practices and data collection procedures against the standards articulated in this statement....

View All Insights