(CN) – The biggest court in the nation, Los Angeles Superior Court, opened a media portal Monday that gives journalists access to new court filings as soon as they are electronically received.
“Quick access to court filings is essential for journalists to do their jobs,” said David Snyder, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition. “Reporters are in the business of providing the public with current news. So quick access is really critical for reporters to do what they do, which is to inform the public about what is happening in the court system.”
All four federal district courts in California follow the same policy, making new filings public as soon as they are received by the court clerk. In addition, three e-filing state courts in California now give the same upon-receipt access to journalists.
The media access portal’s Monday opening came on the same day that the Los Angeles court switched to mandatory electronic filing of complex cases. The mandatory e-filing policy broadens to include all civil filings at the start of the new year.
Use of the new portal is based on an agreement with members of the media that says, “LASC will allow access through MAP to civil data and documents, including complaints of unlimited jurisdiction that have been received from a litigant but not yet processed.”
Those terms track a 2016 federal ruling in Los Angeles by Judge James Otero where he wrote, “A qualified First Amendment right of timely access to such complaints attaches when new complaints are received by a court.”
In the 30-page ruling, he prohibited the Ventura court clerk from “refusing to make newly filed unlimited civil complaints available until after such complaints are ‘processed’ – i.e., the performance of administrative tasks that follow the court's receipt of a new complaint.”
“That ruling gets it right,” said Snyder. “There is a First Amendment right to access to records that are filed in court and that right attaches when the records are first filed. Any delay is a denial of the right. If you have a right to see those records in the abstract and you don’t actually see them, you are being denied that right.”
The ruling, however, was appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals by California’s Judicial Council, the state court rule-making agency. Lawyers for the council argued that Otero’s decision imposed an administrative burden on the courts and that new cases should not be public until a clerk looked them over.
Oral arguments on that appeal were heard in August by Ninth Circuit judges Kim Wardlaw, Mary Murguia and Randy Smith. The court’s ruling is now pending.
Caitlin Vogus, staff attorney with The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said Monday’s opening of a media portal in Los Angeles confirmed the argument by the press in the Ninth Circuit saying access on receipt is entirely feasible.
“We think it’s extremely important that public and press have timely access to court filings,” said Vogus. “The reason is because the purpose of the First Amendment right to access to court records is to allow the public to monitor what’s going on in our judicial system. The press acts as a surrogate for the public.”