Glomar response

Lower courts have thus far ruled the Glomar response to have potential merit if the secretive nature of the material truly requires it, and only if the agency provides "as much information as possible" to justify its claim.

The phrase itself, "neither confirm nor deny", has long appeared frequently in news reports, as an alternative to a "no comment" response when the respondent does not wish to answer.

[3] In 1916, Ford representatives said they would "neither confirm nor deny" that price cuts were in the offing for its popular Model-T automobile.

Journalist Harriet Ann Phillippi requested that the CIA provide disclosure of both the Glomar project and its attempts to censor the story.

In response, the CIA chose to "neither confirm nor deny" both the project's existence and its attempts to keep the story unpublished.

In a subsequent lawsuit, Phillippi requested "all records relating to the Director's or any other agency personnel's attempts to persuade" media to refrain from publishing further stories about the clandestine project.

[6] Additionally, she asked the court to demand the Agency to provide a "detailed justification" for the information said to be "exempt from disclosure.

In 1976, Phillippi appealed, arguing that the Agency "should have been required to support its position on the basis of the public record.