Florida Federal Court Releases Redacted Warrant Affidavit in Unprecedented Search of Former President Trump’s Florida ResidenceCharles D. Tobin and Elizabeth Seidlin-Bernstein
The news organizations argued that, even in the middle of an investigation and before any indictment, a search warrant affidavit is a judicial record to which the presumption of public access attaches.
The ruling bowls over text and precedent and is a potential disaster for government transparency.
The court’s holding that the reporter was entitled to bring his lawsuit challenging the non-response has far-reaching consequences and has been hailed as a major victory for transparency in California.
A recent spate of high-profile cases, across the country, demonstrate that many judges, in both state and federal courts, are of the view that there is no presumption of public access to the names of seated jurors, not only at the outset of a trial, but even post-verdict.
Affirming its well-established precedent on access to judicial records, the Eleventh Circuit recently upheld a district court’s order unsealing internal communications obtained during discovery and filed in connection with a motion for a preliminary injunction.
At issue in the appeal were the names, investigated facts, and explanation of Mueller’s declination decisions for two groups of people: those investigated for campaign finance and computer intrusion offenses, and those investigated for making false statements to the government in the course of the investigation.
The high court held that a state statute prohibiting the sealing of certain warrant information meant what it said, finding that the question “is not a close one.” But the path to the ruling was far from typical.
With this ruling, it appears that the media will only be able to access law enforcement records if law enforcement makes a voluntary disclosure, the records are introduced as exhibits at trial, or, possibly, if the case is already closed. The sweeping ruling stands as a high-water mark for government secrecy of law enforcement records…
The court held that the names of the subcontractors being paid with state funds to lobby for wolf-delisting were not properly classified as protected “trade secrets” or “commercial information,” under Utah’s open records statute, and that in any event the names must be released because the public interest in access outweighs any interests in restriction…
In a recently filed suit, five visual journalists are suing the NYPD for civil rights violations after each journalist was targeted, beaten, or arrested by NYPD officers while attempting to cover the 2020 George Floyd protests in New York City.