HUD Withholds AI Implementation Details Amid DOGE Policy Push

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) appears to be denying Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests regarding the use of artificial intelligence to inform policy decisions, according to reporting from Wired.

Documents obtained by the nonprofit legal organization Democracy Forward reveal that members of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) operating within HUD used AI to identify agency rules for potential contract cancellations or rescissions. Key figures involved include Christopher Sweet, a University of Chicago graduate, and Scott Langmack, who previously worked at the property technology startup Kukun and now serves as the executive director of deregulation AI at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

HUD has withheld over 100 documents, nearly all of them citing "deliberative process privilege" under Exemption 5. However, Wired reports that HUD also cited a nonexistent "AI privilege" and a presidential communications privilege to block the release of materials. Withheld files include a document titled "GPT defined Econ Analysis approach 11 10 25.docx," belonging to Langmack and labeled as "deliberative AI input," and another titled "RegulatoryAnalysisPrompt.pdf," also belonging to Langmack, that suggests the team was developing prompts for regulatory analysis.

Tori Noble, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Wired that the lack of transparency is worrisome because AI tools can hallucinate, exhibit bias, or produce errors. Noble noted that access to prompts is the primary method for determining how these tools are used and the potential harm they may cause. Mark Fagan, a lecturer at the Harvard Kennedy School, added that disclosing AI use is good protocol to build public confidence, though he noted some uses might be considered part of a standard deliberative process.