Constitutional Law

Mont. Supreme Court considers access restrictions

By By The Associated Press

HELENA, Mont. ? The Montana Supreme Court is considering restrictions to public access of certain information now available throughout the court system, including a proposal to seal all documents filed in family law cases except for final orders.

Freedom of information advocates say the proposals are unnecessary and would run counter to the right-to-know provisions in the state constitution.

The Supreme Court put the recommendations out for public comment on Dec. 7. The comment period will last for 90 days.

State Law Librarian Judith Meadows, one of the authors of the proposals, said a change was needed because the court system's existing privacy rules aren't being applied evenly and people not represented by lawyers don't understand them.

That means sensitive information about children involved a custody dispute, divorce or another court proceeding could find its way to the Internet, where it could be gathered by child predators or be used to bully a child, Meadows said.

"We're trying to keep the horse in the barn before the door is opened," Meadows said.

Technological advances over the past decade have created greater access to court information than ever before, she said. "The problem is, the rules need changing to catch up with the technology," she added.

The court system's privacy rules were created by a Supreme Court-appointed Privacy and Access Task Force and approved by the high court in 2007. The rules were adopted in anticipation that all records from district courts down to justice courts would one day be available on the Internet. That has not happened yet, though state Supreme Court dockets and decisions are available online.

One of the members of that task force, Ian Marquand, said the new recommendations go far beyond the group's work, which had the same goal to protect litigants while balancing the public's right to know.

"To my eyes, this would create a secret part of our justice system in Montana," Marquand said. "To take an entire class of litigation and essentially lock it away, that's a big step. That's something I think we need to consider very, very carefully."

Marquand, the chairman of Montana's Freedom of Information Hotline and president of the state's chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists, said the task force should reconvene to discuss the proposals.

Mike Meloy, a Helena attorney who specializes in freedom of information issues, said he considered the proposals unnecessary because there has been no outcry to change the existing privacy rules.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it," Meloy said. "I don't see any evidence that there has been a significant problem with information from the courts on the Internet or otherwise."

Full post as published by First Amendment Center on December 24, 2010 (boomark / email).