Feeling the heat over its new rules to redact public records, the Oklahoma Supreme Court may put off implementing the new rules or it may create a task force to study them further, an official said.
Michael Evans, court administrator for the state Supreme Court, said the court is receiving public input on its decision to restrict the full use of Social Security numbers, birth dates and other personal identifiers in district court filings.
The rules affect online filings and paper documents filed at the courthouse.
The new rules were unveiled March 11 by Chief Justice James R. Winchester. Winchester has said the rules were developed to thwart the possibility of identity theft through court records.
While there is some support for the new rules, Evans said there is also strong opposition.
The most vocal opposition is coming from businesses, employers and the media, who rely on public records to check a person’s criminal history or other pertinent background information.
‘‘These rules will have some adjustment going forward and I think the justices anticipated that,’’ Evans said. ‘‘I did not feel that the rules were the last word and I don’t see this as a win-lose situation.
‘‘This is a difficult issue and people have a right to disagree.
But I believe the court has acted responsibly in how they are handling it,’’ Evans said.
Three justices dissented or dissented in part when the state Supreme Court issued the new rules.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court is taking public comments and could modify the new rules before they become effective June 10, Evans said.
However, any modification would honor the original intent to protect a person’s identity, Evans said.
Additionally, Evans said the court is expected to meet this week and could discuss delaying the implementation date of the rules. The justices also could discuss forming a task force to study the impact of the rules.
Meanwhile, online court filings that were pulled offline immediately may be placed back online in the future with a modified version of the rules, Evans said.
‘‘The key point is that the justices are listening to the public input and considering how to proceed,’’ Evans said.
Public Access Committee: Evans answered questions about how the new redaction rules originated and how they were developed without broad input from judges, lawyers and the public.
Without modification, the rules bring new levels of redaction to public records during a time when Oklahoma’s court system was moving forward with placing more records online and offering greater ease in accessing court records.
The genesis of the new rules appears to have come from a committee called together by Evans last year to discuss open records and public access.
The committee was known as the Public Access Committee, which met half a dozen times in 2006 and early 2007, said Lisa Lambert, Payne County court clerk and committee chairwoman.
The Public Access Committee was made up of eight court clerks and five state Supreme Court staff members, Lambert said.
Evans said he was routinely involved in meeting with the committee and briefing the chief justice on its discussions.
Evans said he called the committee together due to the ongoing question of public records and how much personal information should be included in civil, criminal, divorce, probate and other district court records.
‘‘The committee and rules originated based on concerns I had over the public display of personal information and based on my 35 years as an attorney,’’ said Evans, who has practiced law in Frederick.
Evans was hired by the court in 2006. As court administrator, he works for all nine justices, but he works more closely with Winchester as part of his assigned duties, he said.
In addition to his 35 years of law experience, Evans said he called the committee together based on articles written by legal professionals discussing identity theft and open records.
When asked why he did not seek greater input from judges, lawyers or private citizens, Evans said: ‘‘The court is now entertaining citizen involvement and public input from all affected by the rules.’’
Evans said he couldn’t cite specific examples of identity theft associated with court records, “but there are plenty of anecdotal examples and it’s not a stretch of the imagination to believe that a (published) Social Security number won’t be a target for theft if available.’’
Online focus: Meanwhile, Lambert said the Public Access Committee primarily discussed protecting personal information online.
Court dockets and some pleadings are placed online at www.oscn.net, which is overseen by the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
While Lambert supports the new redaction rules, she said that redacting paper records was not a focus of the committee’s work.
‘‘I respect the Supreme Court for this order but I did not personally have much input in the totality of the order as it was written,’’ Lambert said.
Evans said there is no practical difference between online and paper documents.
‘‘The committee discussed (redacting) paper documents but I can understand to some extent that the committee only thought we addressed the Internet,’’ Evans said.
Possible problems: Oklahoma County Court Clerk Patricia Presley has said the new rules will cause more problems than they might solve.
Tulsa business owner Nancy Lynn Roberts said the new rules would be heavily burdensome to her backgroundchecking business.
Roberts’ business provides background screening for employers, property management companies, apartment managers and for volunteer organizations such as Big Brothers and Big Sisters.
‘‘The new rules are very concerning not just for businesses in Oklahoma but for citizens in Oklahoma,’’ Roberts said. ‘‘The citizens are the ones seeking jobs and information.’’
Comments sought
To offer input on the the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s new redaction rules, contact court administrator Michael Evans at michael.evans@oscn.net or by mail at Oklahoma State Courts Network, Administrative Office of the Courts, 1915 N. Stiles, Suite 305, Oklahoma City, OK 73105.
omer.gillham@tulsaworld.com
No comments:
Post a Comment