Secrecy move stirs discord

Comments Comment on this article8

By Nolan Clay
Published: March 15, 2008

Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice Marian Opala criticized fellow justices Friday, calling new secrecy rules on court records ill-conceived, censorship and shocking.
Advertisement

"How can you keep public records from public knowledge?” he said from a national meeting in Tucson, Ariz.

"I don't understand how anybody who is a lawyer can say that a government can ration, censor or screen public records from the public. There's just no way.”

Opala is known as a champion of the rights found in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. A First Amendment award is named for him. He said "the First Amendment does not allow public information to be screened or rationed.”

"You cannot ration public information. It has to flow, and nobody can stop it,” he said.

Justices have faced widespread criticism this week over the new policy.

Justices ordered the removal of court documents from the Internet. They also ruled that court documents filed at the courthouse in the future cannot have certain personal information such as birth dates.

Justices said they acted to keep sensitive information from identity thieves.

Five justices voted for the rules. Two agreed with part of the policy and disagreed with the rest. Justice Steven Taylor voted against the new policy and Opala chose not to vote even though he opposes it.

"I decided not to participate in that brouhaha because I've been in enough controversies with the court,” Opala said.

The rules do not go into effect until June 10. Chief Justice James Winchester wrote in a letter to a Senate leader, "We believe this 90-day window will give us time to further refine the particulars of policy implementation.”

The chief justice also is welcoming public comments. Comments can be e-mailed to Michael Evans, the administrative director of the courts, at michael.evans@oscn.net .

Court officials said the new policy came about in part after the National Center for State Courts warned them last month that in other states "there are several documented instances of identity theft that were based on information gleaned from court Web sites.”

Opala said he is unsure whether the rules will be revised.

"It's difficult to predict. At times, they dig in when there is a public outcry,” he said. "To me, it was shocking that they took the position to begin with. In the face of the First Amendment, there just isn't any question.”

Toolbar sponsored by: David Stanley Ford
Bookmark and Share


Comments

Leave a comment. Log in below or sign up (it's free).

   
Dave, you sound like someone with something to hide. I have no problem with my birth date or town listed on OSCN. If anyone was to run my full name through the system, it would show a man with the exact same name as me having a felony conviction but born on a different day. Without the birthdays listed no one could tell the difference and how would that look if a prospective employer was to see that, I sure wouldn't get a job handling money. So keep the birthdays and towns listed, but remove social security numbers and any bank account numbers.
Robert, Newalla - Mar 15, 2008 10:53 PM
• Report: Offensive language
Candace that site is not oscn, its the oklahoma county assessor site
Jonbonjovy, Oklahoma City - Mar 15, 2008 4:14 PM
• Report: Offensive language
Go Opala!!
Jonbonjovy, Oklahoma City - Mar 15, 2008 4:13 PM
• Report: Offensive language
The Supreme Court is correct in setting tighter rules for access to court records via the internet. Few people gain access via the internet for a good and lawful purpose, most do it try and gain an advantage against someone or steal their identity. This isn't about secrecy, it is about personal privacy. I guess those against these rules would also be in favor of wiretaps and search of your home without a warrant. Constitutional law needs to be taught so that people will quit giving up their rights just because The Oklahoman has to work a little harder to get the information they want.
Dave, Oklahoma City - Mar 15, 2008 4:05 PM
• Report: Offensive language
Until recently, you could log on to OSCN and pull-up the names of different people who owned several different pieces of property and you could see how much they paid on property tax for their dwellings. It was very inconsistent how one person might on a 2600 sq. ft. home and only pay very small amount of property tax compared to someone who had a dinky little house and paid a lot more...
Candace, Lakeland - Mar 15, 2008 1:39 PM
• Report: Offensive language
The information is being made less available to cover up public information that lawyers don't want thier client's embarrassed by. Sure anyone can drive to any of the 77 counties in Oklahoma and wait while a blue haired lady carries out stacks of court records, logs and books for you to look through. The same information can be found in those documents as could be on line. The role of Oklahoma these days is to insist to return to the past fighting any progress technology offers. From a politician's, lawyer's or Judge's view point,"the best public information is that which can't be found". Identity thieves are resourceful, birth dates can be generated from countless resources. This move is not achieving anything other than to keep crooks safe! Thus enter the Oklahoma Supreme Court. I've met Marion Opala on numerous occassions, and had the opportunity to dine with him at a "Committee of 100" event years ago, I was very impressed with him then, as I continue to be now. His collegues would be wise to reconsider their motion to make it harder to access public information.
B , wittmann - Mar 15, 2008 1:11 PM
• Report: Offensive language
Brother Terry Sledge, a great preacher and an even better dry waller (just kidding) once told me he loved putting up drywall. He compared it to Christ's love. He said that with drywall, tape, and mud you can hide a multitude of sins and make even an old broken down building look new again. I guess our state supreme court is pulling out the mud. Maybe for good and bad reasons. Good in that a person could start a new life after prison by having their records declared secret. Bad because those secrets are called skeletons. If a person isn't honest on an application about the past, then can you trust them on the future. An employer who handles a lot of cash won't be able to search state civil court records to see if someone has been sued by a previous employer for stealing money. Since it only shows generic docket info, the court rendered the OSCN useless. A total waste, a complete and utter misuse of state funds. The whole site should be immediately terminated and anyone who runs it reassigned to another job. Dockets mean absolutely nothing. Names mean nothing without identifying documentation. OSCN is a tremendous waste of state taxpayers funds and I hope our legislature shuts it down until it can provide a real service and not just novelty entertainment.
Sparky (Mark), Oklahoma City - Mar 15, 2008 11:44 AM
• Report: Offensive language
It's not being kept from the public. The records are still there if I wish to see them. All I have to do is go down to the courthouse and they are available for public inspection.
Anonymous, Everywhere - Mar 15, 2008 11:42 AM
• Report: Offensive language