City Sued Over Withholding 9/11 Air Quality Information

Advocates demand transparency on what New York City knew about post-attack air dangers

Mar. 30, 2026 at 9:48pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A cinematic painting of a quiet Lower Manhattan street corner, with warm sunlight and deep shadows creating a sense of melancholy and unease, conceptually representing the ongoing battle for answers and accountability regarding the city's response to the 9/11 attacks.The fight for transparency over the city's actions in the aftermath of 9/11 continues, as advocates demand answers about the public health dangers that were allegedly downplayed.NYC Today

Advocates for 9/11 victims have filed a lawsuit against New York City, demanding the release of information about what the city knew regarding the air quality dangers in Lower Manhattan following the 2001 terrorist attacks. The advocates say the city has repeatedly denied their Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests for risk assessments, communications, and the basis for the city's claims that the air was safe for residents to return.

Why it matters

This case highlights ongoing concerns about government transparency and accountability, especially around major historical events like 9/11 that have had long-lasting health impacts on the public. The advocates argue the city's withholding of information is a 'moral injury' that undermines public trust in democracy.

The details

The lawsuit was filed by the advocacy group 9/11 Health Watch, which has been seeking the release of city records through FOIL requests since 2023. The group says the city has repeatedly denied having the requested information or claimed it could not search its records. However, the city later released 68 boxes of records in November 2025 after initially saying it had none. The advocates also uncovered an October 2001 memo showing the city lobbied the White House and Congress for liability protection while publicly claiming the air was safe.

  • In 2023, 9/11 Health Watch filed FOIL requests seeking the city's records.
  • In November 2025, the Department of Environmental Protection released 68 boxes of records after initially saying it had none.
  • In February 2026, advocates uncovered an October 2001 memo showing the city sought liability protection while claiming the air was safe.

The players

9/11 Health Watch

An advocacy group for 9/11 victims and their families that has been seeking the release of city records related to air quality dangers.

Andrew Carboy

An attorney representing 9/11 Health Watch in the lawsuit against the city.

Gale Brewer

A New York City Council member who authored legislation requiring an investigation into the city's handling of 9/11 air quality information.

Zohran Mamdani

The current mayor of New York City.

Steven Banks

The New York City Corporation Counsel.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“This fight isn't about money. This fight isn't about victims' compensation. This fight is about answers. This is a moral injury case. The answers are so important because this country is a democracy. One of the foundations of our democracy is open government and transparency. When people don't trust their government, that's not stabilizing.”

— Andrew Carboy, Attorney for 9/11 Health Watch

“The mayor should put everybody in the room and say, 'Let's get this done. Let's find all the boxes. Let's see what's available.'”

— Gale Brewer, New York City Council Member

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide whether to compel the city to release the requested records. The New York City Department of Investigation is also seeking $4 million in funding to carry out a Council-mandated probe into the city's handling of 9/11 air quality information.

The takeaway

This lawsuit highlights the ongoing battle for transparency and accountability around the government's actions and decision-making in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. The advocates argue the city's withholding of information is a violation of democratic principles and undermines public trust.