Federal Court Upholds State Sunshine Laws

By Buckman, Robert | Editor & Publisher, June 29, 1996 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Federal Court Upholds State Sunshine Laws

Buckman, Robert, Editor & Publisher

THE FIRST AMENDMENT roots of state open meeting laws received some much-needed watering recently when the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down two broad gag orders that a federal judge had issued in a Louisiana school desegregation case.

The unanimous decision of a three-judge panel of the New Orleans appeals court marked a triumph for the Baton Rouge daily Advocate and its sister television station, WBRZ.

The two news outlets had appeated U.S. District judge john V Parker Jr.'s order that had prohibited elected or appointed officials of die East Baton Rouge Parish School District from dicussing with the media sensitive negotiations underway in a 40-year-old civil desegregation suit against the district. It also struck down an order in which the judge authorized the school board to hold close-door meetings to discuss the desegregation plan.

In a peculiar overlapping of state and federal jurisdiction, the panel's decision faulted Parker for issuing the orders "without even considering die Louisiana Open Meetings Law.",

The dispute arose Feb. 6 when Parker, at the request of the school board, issued a sweeping confidentiality order, that "prohibited elected board members, other school district officials, the board's attorneys or any of the school district's 7,OOO employees from making,"any oral or written comment" on,"any aspect of any draft school desegregation plan."

"It was the most incredibly broad order," said Linda Lightfoot, executive editor of the Advocate. "It was classic prior restraint. We found that any time we cared any school principal and asked about anything not even remotely related to the desegregation case, they said they couldn't talk. So we had to appeal."

On Feb. 22, Parker held a hearing on the news organizations' motion to vacate his Feb. 6 order, but he reflised to amend it. The news organization then notified Parker of their intent to appeal to the 5th circuit.

"The judge was furious," Lightfoot recaued with a snlile. "The public, for once, was on our side. They were furious about the gag order. The legal issue was, did we, not being a party to the lawsuit, have a right to challenge [the gag order]?"

On Feb. 26, after the notice of appeal, Parker began a strategic withdrawal from the blanket Feb. 6 order, acknowledging that it had been "inartfully drawn" to encompass all school district On March 1, he issued a revised order gagging only board members and those officials involved in the desegregation plan. The Advocate and WBRZ promptty appealed this order as well, and on March 7, the 5th Circuit granted their motion for an expedited appeal.

"We had sent [copies of] this order to just about every First amendment organization in the country, and the friends of the court [briefs] began flocking in," Lightfoot said. Among those rallying behind the Advocate were the New York Times, Society of Professional Journalists and the First Amendment Center.

Meanwhde, even after a hearing and the 5th Circuit's granting of an expedited appeal, Parker implemented another order on March 8 authorizing the school board to hold "private confidential sessions" to discuss the desegregation plan, a subject not included among the justifications for executive sessions under the Louisiana Pubfic Meetings Act. Within three hours, the news organizations had filed a stay motion with the 5th Circuit, and slightly more than an hour later, the 5th Circifit agreed.

"This was at 6 p.m. on a Friday afternoon," Lightfoot said in wonderment. The school board then canceled the meetings it had scheduled for that weekend.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Federal Court Upholds State Sunshine Laws


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?