{"id":21198,"date":"2026-03-02T13:52:25","date_gmt":"2026-03-02T13:52:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.theblackvault.com\/documentarchive\/?p=21198"},"modified":"2026-03-02T22:00:07","modified_gmt":"2026-03-02T22:00:07","slug":"despite-trumps-call-to-release-uap-files-navy-denies-appeal-for-78-classified-uap-photographs","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.theblackvault.com\/documentarchive\/despite-trumps-call-to-release-uap-files-navy-denies-appeal-for-78-classified-uap-photographs\/","title":{"rendered":"Despite Trump\u2019s Call to Release UAP Files, Navy Denies Appeal for 78 Classified UAP Photographs"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>Just days after former President Donald Trump publicly stated that he wanted to order the release of UFO and UAP-related files, the U.S. Navy formally denied an appeal seeking the release of 78 photographs designated as \u201cunidentified aerial phenomena\u201d (UAP).<\/p>\n

The decision, dated February 24, 2026, upholds a prior full denial of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by The Black Vault in September 2022 under case number DON-NAVY-2022-012661. The appeal was assigned tracking number 2026-NavyAppeal-000123.<\/p>\n

The original request sought \u201call photographs with the designation of \u2018unidentified aerial phenomena or \u2018UAP\u2019 as archived by the U.S. Navy.\u201d In November 2024, the Navy\u2019s initial denial authority determined that 78 responsive photographs existed but withheld them in full under FOIA Exemption (b)(1), citing classification under Executive Order 13526 and the UAP Classification Guide.<\/p>\n

Appeal Denied in Full<\/strong><\/p>\n

In its appeal response, the Office of the Judge Advocate General confirmed that all 78 photographs remain classified.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe IDA confirmed that as of today, these records are still classified in accordance with Executive Order 13526,\u201d the letter states.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The decision further concludes that \u201cgiven the nature of the requested documents, segregation was not possible,\u201d meaning that no portion of the photographs could be released in redacted form.<\/p>\n

The Navy emphasized that when information is properly classified under FOIA Exemption (b)(1), there is effectively no discretion to release it. Citing federal regulations, the letter states: \u201cIf potentially responsive information qualifies as exemption (b)(1) information, there is \u2018no discretion\u2019 regarding its release.\u201d<\/p>\n

The appeal authority added that it must defer to the Original Classification Authority (OCA), explaining: \u201cI am satisfied that the OCA\u2019s classification of the records responsive to your request satisfies the requirements under FOIA exemption (b)(1)\u2026 Therefore, as the DON appellate authority for FOIA appeals, I have no authority to tell the OCA otherwise.\u201d<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the appeal was denied.<\/p>\n

Executive Order at the Center of Secrecy<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>The legal foundation for the continued withholding is Executive Order 13526, which governs the classification of national security information. The Navy\u2019s letter reiterates that under FOIA Exemption (b)(1), agencies must withhold information that is \u201cproperly and currently classified in the interest of national defense or foreign policy, as specifically authorized under the criteria established by Executive Order.\u201d<\/p>\n

Executive Order 13526 permits classification of information concerning \u201cmilitary plans, weapons systems, or operations,\u201d and once deemed properly classified, courts traditionally grant agencies broad deference.<\/p>\n

The irony is difficult to overlook. The same executive authority that enables a president to order declassification is also the mechanism currently cited to block release of UAP imagery. While public rhetoric has increasingly emphasized transparency, the binding legal structure of Executive Order-based classification continues to prevail inside the FOIA process.<\/p>\n

Public Calls for UAP Transparency<\/strong><\/p>\n

The appeal submitted in November 2025 argued that there is substantial public interest in the photographs, particularly in light of recent Congressional scrutiny over alleged UAP overclassification. It cited testimony from the November 13, 2024, congressional hearing titled \u201cUnidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Exposing the Truth,\u201d where witnesses raised concerns about excessive secrecy surrounding UAP-related material.<\/p>\n

For now, the photographs remain classified, and the tension between calls for transparency and entrenched classification authority remains unresolved, despite the words of a sitting U.S. President and calls from Congress for the release of records.<\/p>\n

###<\/p>\n