Secret Justice:Secret Dockets Court dockets allow the public to learn that a case exists and to track it through the judicial system. But when cases are kept off the docket — in controversies ranging from the conviction of terrorism suspect Iyman Faris to the divorce proceedings of saxophonist Clarence Clemons — they proceed through the courts undetected. These secret dockets threaten the First Amendment rights of the publicSummer 2003 and press to monitor the judicialThe Reporters Committee system and follow cases inFor Freedom of the Press courtrooms across the country.
Secret Justice: A continuing series Discovering The American judicial system has, historically, been open to the public, secret dockets and the U.S. Supreme Court has con- tinually affirmed the presumption of openness. However, as technology ex- Reporters check court dockets pands and as the perceived threat of to find out what cases have been violence grows, individual courts attempt to keep control over proceed- filed in courts across the country. ings by limiting the flow of information. The docket reveals the case num- Courts are reluctant to allow media ac- ber assigned by the court, the cess to certain cases or to certain pro- parties’ names, and a brief entry ceedings, like jury selection. Courts of each document filed or action routinely impose gag orders to limit taken in the case. Normally, all of public discussion about pending cases, this information is public record presuming that there is no better way to and can be obtained either from ensure a fair trial. Many judges fear that the court clerk’s office, the court’s having cameras in courtrooms will some- public inquiry computer termi- how interfere with the decorum and solemnity of judicial proceedings. Such nals, the court’s Web site, or steps, purportedly taken to ensure fair- through PACER, an electronic ness, may actually harm the integrity of public access service where feder- a trial because court secrecy and limits al court docket information can on information are contrary to the fun- be accessed for a fee. The infor- damental constitutional guarantee of a mation on the docket is evidence public trial. that a particular case exists and The public should be the beneficiary allows someone to track the case of the judicial system. Criminal pro- through the judicial system. ceedings are instituted in the name of AP PHOTO According to a survey by The Iyman Faris’s arrest and detention was kept “the people” for the benefit of the pub- lic. Civil proceedings are available for Reporters Committee for Free- secret by the Justice Department. members of the public to obtain justice, dom of the Press for this guide, either individually or on behalf of a federal courts and many state “class” of persons similarly situated. The courts allow for “super-secret” cases, which run, had disappeared or had been captured. public, therefore, should be informed never appear on the public docket or are For individuals such as Faris, there is “a new — well informed — about trials of pub- hidden using pseudonyms, such as “Sealed category that seems to be evolving outside lic interest. The media, as the public’s v. Sealed” or “John Doe v. Jane Doe.” the orbit of the criminal-justice system,” representative, needs to be aware of Courts that maintain these secret dockets the Newsweek reporters wrote. threats to openness in court proceed- will neither confirm nor deny the existence Only after Newsweek reported on Faris ings, and must be prepared to fight to of such cases. As a result, these cases pro- did Attorney General John Ashcroft reveal insure continued access to trials. In this series, the Reporters Com- ceed through the court system undetected. that Faris had pleaded guilty to terrorist mittee takes a look at key aspects of charges more than a month earlier. The court secrecy and how they affect the Terrorism “outside the orbit” Justice Department denied that the News- newsgathering process. We will exam- The most recent examples of secret dock- week story had anything to do with Ash- ine trends toward court secrecy, and ets involve cases against accused terrorists. coft’s June 19 press conference in which he what can be done to challenge it. On May 1, Iyman Faris pleaded guilty to first announced the capture of Faris and his The first article in this “Secret Jus- providing material support to al Qaida, plea agreement. tice” series, published in Fall 2000, con- including researching ultralight airplanes, “Our need to keep it secret had dissipat- cerned the growing trend of anonymous procuring lightweight sleeping bags, plane ed,” said Mark Corallo, a spokesperson for juries. The second installment, pub- tickets and cell phones, and assisting in a the Justice Department. lished in Spring 2001, covered gag or- ders on participants in trials. The third, plan to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge for the The Justice Department will not divulge published in Fall 2001, covered access terrorist organization. But his arrest, in- how many other individuals are being held to alternative dispute resolution proce- dictment and, ultimately, his plea bargain in secret on terrorism charges. “We have dures. The fourth, published in Winter with the Justice Department proceeded in been very consistent in not discussing exact 2002, covered access to terrorism pro- absolute secrecy. numbers,” Corallo said. “Even though it ceedings. Faris’ case may have remained a secret seems like innocuous information, it is not.” were it not for two Newsweek reporters, Corallo claimed that providing numbers Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball, who of individuals arrested on terrorism charges This report was researched and written discovered through intelligence documents would “give a road map to the terrorists.” by Sara Thacker, who is the 2002-2003 that Faris was suspected of working for key Terrorist organizations could determine McCormick-Tribune Legal Fellow at the Reporters Committee. al Qaida operative Khalid Shaikh Moham- how many terrorists the Justice Depart- med. In a June 18, 2003 article, the report- ment has captured and monitor the govern- ers speculated whether Faris was on the ment’s progress, he explained.PAGE 2 THE REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS SUMMER 2003
The divorce of E Street Band saxophonist Clarence Clemons, pictured at left with Bruce Springsteen, was hidden on a secret docket in Connecticut. AP PHOTO But the government never has explained While no one knows how many cases operation agreement with the government,”how a terrorist operative could be in U.S. such as Bellahouel’s exist, secret dockets are the Florida federal court docket does notcontrol for months and why the terrorist not limited to cases involving terrorism. reflect that these cases even exist, accordingorganization with which he is allegedly to attorneys for Ochoa, who in May 2003involved could not determine that its oper- Secret crimes filed a brief requesting the elimination ofative was missing, said Lee Gelernt, an Attorneys for alleged Co- the “dual docketing” systemattorney for the American Civil Liberties lumbian drug trafficker and disclosure of sealed pro-Union. Fabio Ochoa-Vasquez dis- ceedings to the Eleventh This debate raises the question: Is such covered an entire system of Circuit.secrecy really needed to protect national “dual docketing” in U.S. Dis- Not only does this typesecurity or is it being used to protect the trict Court in Florida that of secrecy deprive Ochoa ofgovernment from scrutiny? deprived them of informa- his due process rights, it is a It was only through a court clerk’s mis- tion for their client’s defense. violation of the First Amend-take that the Miami Daily Business Review Ochoa alleges that a gov- ment and common law rightsdiscovered the case of Mohamed Kamel ernment informant bribed of access to judicial proceed-Bellahouel, who apparently filed suit in a him and that for $30 million ings, Ochoa’s attorneys ar-federal court in Florida against Monica S. he would receive no more gued.Wetzel, a former warden at the Federal than a five-year sentence. The use of secret docketsCorrectional Institution in South Miami- Ochoa also alleges that an- by the federal Southern Dis-Dade County. other government informant trict of Florida conflicts with According to the Business Review, Bella- told him that a U.S. program a decision issued by the Elev-houel “was once mistakenly suspected of existed in which drug traf- AP PHOTO enth Circuit ten years earli-involvement with terrorists” and appears to fickers could pay their way to Fabio Ochoa-Vasquez er in United States v. Valenti.have filed a petition seeking freedom from a reduced sentence and that two traffickers, In that case, the government charged crim-unlawful imprisonment. However, the pub- Nicholas Bergonzoli and Julio Correa, had inal defense attorney Charles Corces andlic docket will not reveal that Bellahouel’s already participated in the program. state prosecutor John Valenti with conspir-case even exists or why his case is pending Even though Bergonzoli pleaded guilty ing to obtain favorable treatment for crim-before the U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta to importing cocaine and an attorney ac- inal defendants who paid Valenti. After the(11th Cir.). knowledged representing Correa in “a co- two were indicted, the state dismissed theSUMMER 2003 SECRET JUSTICE: SECRET DOCKETS PAGE 3
University of Connecticut President Philip E. Austin also benefitted from Connecticut’s secret docket system. AP PHOTOcase; however, a secret docket prevented cluding the case number, the parties’ names, super-secret cases,” Klau said.the public from learning about closed pre- the nature of the case, and all court docu- “In my experience, the party in divorcetrial bench conferences and the filing of in- ments remained off the public docket. Lev- who is in the less powerful bargaining posi-camera pretrial motions. A reporter from el 2 docketing permitted disclosure of the tion doesn’t want secrecy,” Scheffey ex-the St. Petersburg Times learned about the case number and parties’ names, but sealed plained.secret docket when he observed a closed- all other information. And Level 3 cases As the Law Tribune and the Hartfordbench conference and sought access to the were open to the public except for certain Courant discovered, among those to benefittranscripts. sealed documents contained in the court from Level 1 secrecy were University of On appeal to the Eleventh Circuit, the file. This secret docketing system is not Connecticut President Philip E. Austin andcourt held that the “maintenance of a public found in Connecticut court rules or stat- Clarence Clemons, the saxophonist in Bruceand a sealed docket is inconsistent with utes, but was established as an internal Springsteen’s E Street Band, whose divorceaffording the various interests of the public administrative procedure to assist court cases are not on the public docket.and the press meaningful access to criminal clerks in processing sealed files. There is the “perception that there’s anproceedings.” Last fall, Connecticut Law Tribune re- insider’s game . . . that there’s a judicial According to Ochoa’s attorneys, this porter Thomas B. Scheffey discovered the system for the rich and powerful and thenholding “is consistent with every circuit secret docketing system while reporting on there’s a judiciary system for the rest of us,”that has decided a similar question.” the divorce of former General Electric said Sen. John A. Kissel during a Judiciary However, while the law disfavors secret Chairman Jack Welch, who filed for di- Committee meeting regarding the super-dockets, they are still used by federal and vorce in Bridgeport, Conn., ending his 13- secret docketing of cases. But any specialstate courts to hide sealed cases. When an year marriage to Jane Welch. treatment to preserve the confidentiality ofentire case is sealed, rather than individual A lawyer connected with the divorce a select few ended July 1 when the Connect-documents, federal courts either remove said he was surprised that the court offered icut Supreme Court issued new rules abol-the case from the public docket or replace a range of levels of secrecy, including com- ishing Level 1 secrecy.the parties’ names with anonymous pseud- plete invisibility, Scheffey said. Under the new rules, all case numbersonyms such as “Sealed v. Sealed.” At least While Welch’s divorce is on the public and case names should be available to the46 U.S. district courts across the country docket, others are kept secret. public unless a special motion is made toallow for these types of secret docketing When the Law Tribune first reported on request permission to use pseudonyms.procedures. Such a system makes it virtual- Connecticut’s secret docketing system in “A judge may issue an order sealing thely impossible for the public and press to December 2002, the judicial branch identi- contents of an entire court file only afterknow what types of cases are being sealed or fied 185 Level 1 civil and family cases. By finding that there is not available a moreto challenge the constitutionality of the July, the judicial branch disclosed that only narrowly tailored method of protecting thesealing orders. 46 Level 1 cases remained. The court re- overriding interest of the public in viewing classified 127 Level 1 cases as Level 2 and the file, such as redaction, sealing a portionSpecial treatment for 11 cases as unsealed. of the file or authorizing the use of pseud-prominent divorcees The Law Tribune and the Hartford Cou- onyms,” said Justice Peter T. Zarella, who In Connecticut, a secret docketing sys- rant have filed suit against the state’s chief presided over the public hearing regardingtem was so hidden that not even the chief court administrator to obtain access to the the rule change.justice knew of its existence. Any party docket information pertaining to the re- If a party wishes to seal the entire courtcould choose to file a case under three maining Level 1 cases. file, he must file a motion to seal. A publicdifferent levels of secrecy. In Level 1 or “Any investigative journalist would want hearing will be held no fewer than 15 days“super-secret” cases, all information, in- to know who are the beneficiaries to these after filing the motion in order to give thePAGE 4 THE REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS SUMMER 2003
An Interview with Daniel J. Klau Daniel J. Klau is a partner in the Hartford, Conn., office of parties in the case (plaintiffs and defendants) want a case sealed. Pepe & Hazard LLP. His practice focuses on appellate, media Thus, when a sealing motion is filed, the judge may not have the and privacy litigation. His media and privacy practice includes benefit of hearing arguments opposing the motion. By requir- representing newspapers and other publishing entities in defa- ing public notice of sealing motions, the media, who usually mation and invasion of privacy cases and in matters involving represents the public’s interest in sealing cases, can take steps to media access to court files and judicial proceedings. Klau intervene in the case and, if appropriate, challenge the sealing represents the Connecticut Law Tribune in the motion. Without public notice, no one other case regarding access to the Level 1 docket. than the court and the parties may ever be aware of the sealing motion. If reporters suspect that a case exists that is not on the docket, what is the If both parties agree that the case first thing they should do? should not appear on the docket, will the case be kept secret? Initially, a reporter should speak to the clerk’s office and ask for the case file. If the clerk refuses Notwithstanding the wishes of the parties, to acknowledge the case or provide the file, ask the case should remain on the docket. to at least see the judge’s sealing order. If that request also is refused, send a letter to the clerk What test does the court use to making these requests in writing and asking for determine whether a docket should be a written response. kept secret? If the court denies a formal request to view the Some state statutes require that certain types of cases be kept secret docket, how would a reporter obtain access secret. For example, certain statutes provide for the erasure of to it? court records after a period of time has elapsed. Reporters need to look to the terms of the specific statutes for the sealing If a reporter has reason to believe that a secret case exists, she requirements. should consider filing a lawsuit in either federal or state court seeking the disclosure of the docket number and names of the What arguments can reporters make to combat parties in the secret case. As of July 2003, such a case is pending the sealing of court dockets? in federal district court in Connecticut. See The Hartford Cou- rant Company v. Pelligrino, Dkt no. 3:03 CV 0313 (CFD). This The best thing that reporters can do is use the power of the case names the Chief Court Administrator and the Chief press to focus public attention on the existence of secret Justice of the Connecticut Supreme Court as defendants (in dockets. The media disclosures in Connecticut about the exist- their administrative capacities) and seeks an order compelling ence of secret cases led to dramatic changes in the court rules, them to disclose the above information. The defendants have as discussed above. As for legal arguments, the law is unsettled, filed motions to dismiss the cases, arguing that they belong in but reporters should be prepared to argue that secret cases state court. No decision has yet been rendered on the motions. violate the First Amendment and, possibly, the due process under the Fifth or Fourteenth Amendments. Are courts required to give the public notice before they seal an entire case or remove it from Isn’t it difficult for reporters to argue that it the docket? is in the public interest to provide access to the secret docket if they don’t know what the As a general rule, notice is required before a court seals an case is about? entire case. In Connecticut, Practice Book rules no longer permit a case to be removed from the docket. Other sealing Yes. The existence of a secret docket naturally leads to many orders, however, are subject to a public notice requirement. Catch-22 arguments. However, reporters need to be aware of The Web page for the Connecticut Judicial Branch contains a a subtle difference between: 1) challenging that part of a sealing special link that directs readers to motions to seal that are on a order that makes a case disappear from the docket; and 2) court’s motion calendar. The link to the Web page is: challenging the part of a sealing order that simply orders that www.jud2.state.ct.us/Civil_Inquiry/SealedShortCalendar.asp. the files should be maintained under seal. The first challenge only seeks minimal information, such as a docket number and Why is public notice so important? docket sheet. The second challenge leads to the unsealing of the entire file, or at least certain documents. While arguing the When a judge rules on a motion to seal a court file or public interest with respect to the second challenge is difficult document therein, she must weigh the public’s compelling in the absence of information about the case, arguing that the interest in having open access to court files against the privacy public has an interest in at least knowing about the existence of interests of the party who filed the motion. Too often, all of the a case is much easier.SUMMER 2003 SECRET JUSTICE: SECRET DOCKETS PAGE 5
public notice of the time and place of the until its elimination in 2000, 446 cases were granted a motion to proceed anonymously,hearing and an opportunity to object to the hidden on the SMC docket. which was filed by an applicant who hadsealing. Peter DeVere, a highway safety activist, been rejected by the state bar. The appli- In addition to posting a short calendar of exposed the secret docket after a trial court cant argued that the confidentiality afford-sealing motions outside the clerk’s office, dismissed his civil complaint against New ed to bar admission proceedings shouldConnecticut’s Judicial Branch will provide Hampshire Supreme Court Justice Linda extend to judicial proceedings. The statepublic notice by listing all sealing motions S. Dalianis. When the court dismissed his supreme court disagreed, finding that mo-on its Web site. case, which alleged that Dalianis had an tions to proceed anonymously are granted While Connecticut’s Judicial Branch re- improper low-digit license plate, it ordered rarely and that the applicant’s desire tosponded with new court rules and proce- that DeVere could not disclose his com- avoid embarrassment, economic loss ordures after the exposure of the super-secret plaint. When DeVere appealed the gag preserve relationships was insufficient todocketing system by the press, courts in order, the court labeled his case SMC-003 overcome the presumption of openness toHawaii still maintain a secret docket. and placed it on the secret docket. judicial proceedings. Last summer, Rob Perez, a reporter for DeVere requested to see the SMC dock-the Honolulu Star Bulletin, reported on Ha- et. In the course of reviewing all cases Civil suits keptwaii’s secret docketing system and exposed placed on the SMC docket, the court made under wrapshow certain divorce cases involving local 344, or 77 percent, of the 446 cases that Federal courts across the country havecelebrities failed to appear on the public appeared on the SMC docket public. Ac- procedures that keep civil suits hidden fromdocket. cording to a report by the state supreme public view. When an entire case is sealed, “If a case was deemed confidential, the court, “the assignment of many matters to federal courts will either keep these casesexistence of the case would not appear on the SMC docket was unnecessary because off the public docket or place them on theour system,” said Lori Okita, a court ad- there was no requirement that the cases be docket with a case number and pseudonym.ministrator for the Hawaii judiciary. “We kept confidential.” When a case is entirely sealed, courtcould not confirm the existence or denial of As a result, the court eliminated the clerks will not disclose any informationa sealed case.” secret docket. On July 1, 2001, the supreme about the case, even to the parties of the court changed its rules to require that all lawsuit.Secrets of judges “docketed entries . . . be available for public “It’s quite frustrating because [the par-& attorneys revealed inspection unless otherwise ordered by the ties] aren’t only sealing it from the public, In New Hampshire, a secret docket called court.” they are sealing it from themselves. So“Special Matters Confidential” kept cases But even when dockets are available to when attorneys call up to find out about theinvolving the conduct and discipline of judg- the public, some parties request to proceed status of their case, for example, if theires and attorneys off the public docket. From anonymously. In John Doe v. Connecticut motion has been granted, we can’t tell them.its inception by the clerk of court in 1985 Bar Examining Committee, the trial court If a case is sealed, we won’t even confirm or deny that the case exists,” said Sonia Van Camp, a docket clerk for the Northern District of Texas. How often federal courts seal cases re- The First Amendment argument mains a mystery. The number of secret cases varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction for access to secret dockets and many courts refused to reveal how many cases are kept off the docket or hid- den by pseudonyms. As of June 2003, the How do you argue for access to a or notices posted in the courthouse. More Middle District of Georgia had 33 secret secret docket? There is little case law recently, many court dockets have been civil cases pending, the Northern District dealing specifically with this issue, but made available on-line or through court of Florida had seven secret civil cases pend- the case law developed on access to computer terminals. ing, the Western District of Arkansas and courts generally should serve well here. The beneficial purpose is also evi- the Eastern District of Wisconsin each had Under the standard that has evolved, dent. By examining the docket, the pub- two secret civil cases pending, and the Dis- the two issues that courts will look to lic can learn about the status of a tricts of North Dakota and South Dakota are whether there is a tradition of open- particular case and can be alerted to did not have any secret civil cases pending. ness and whether openness serves a when particular hearings, arguments and Many federal courts would not say how meaningful purpose. This is often called events will occur. The docket also pro- many cases they had, and the Administra- the “experience and logic” test, and was vides the press and public with notice tive Office of the U.S. Courts does not most clearly articulated by the U.S. that a particular case may be sealed so monitor the number of secret cases filed in Supreme Court in Richmond Newspa- that cases cannot proceed behind a veil federal courts across the country. pers, Inc. v. Virginia and Press-Enterprise of secrecy. Such openness is fundamen- “Each federal court is an animal unto Co. v. Superior Court. tal to the administration of justice. As itself,” said Terry Vaughn, operations The history of access to dockets is the U.S. Supreme Court found in Rich- manager for the Eastern District of New clear. Court dockets are used to alert mond Newspapers, “People in an open York. the public to cases pending in the judi- society do not demand infallibility from Vaughn would not describe the types of cial system and have a long history of their institutions, but it is difficult for cases that are sealed. However, he did ac- openness. Dockets have been histori- them to accept what they are prohibited knowledge that if a potential investor asked cally available through the clerk of court from observing.” the court whether a company had been sued and the case was sealed, the investor would never know.PAGE 6 THE REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS SUMMER 2003
Connecticut Supreme Court Chief Justice William J. Sullivan, pictured at left while swearing in Gov. John G. Rowland earlier this year, told legislators that he — and a majority of the state’s judges — did not know about the state’s secret docket system. AP PHOTO “If the case is sealed, nothing is avail- “I never even knew the court had the bers of all sealed files. These sealed files areable,” Vaughn said. authority to do that,” he told the Judiciary kept under lock and key in filing cabinets When asked to describe what types of Committee. inaccessible to the public.cases may be sealed, Kathryn Brooks, divi- So if members of the legal profession In June, the California Superior Courtsion manager for the Northern District of didn’t know about secret dockets, what provided Moran with a chart of 182 casesIndiana, described a situation in which a tipped reporters off that cases weren’t ap- that have been sealed in San Diego. Morandoctor filed a lawsuit, but requested leave of pearing on the public docket? found that at least 32 of these cases “do notcourt to proceed by another name and to “It doesn’t sort of jump out as an obvious exist” according to the court’s computerseal the case, which was granted. As a result, situation because there are parts of cases index.that case would proceed in secret. that are sealed,” Scheffey said. He discov- New court rules effective July 1 now Even in state courts, reporters have dis- ered Connecticut’s secret docket by talking require case numbers and names to be ac-covered secret dockets. In California, Greg with people who knew the legal system, cessible on the electronic court calendarMoran, a court reporter for the San Diego including attorneys. unless confidential by law.Union-Tribune, discovered that the superi- Scheffey also said that sheriff’s deputies The rule “came about because courtsor court in San Diego allowed cases to be knew about cases that did not appear on the across the state do not currently uniformlykept off the books, including a few normal public docket. “I got some good tips from maintain information in their calendars,civil actions that did not appear on the sheriff’s deputies. I called sheriff’s deputies indexes, or registers of actions,” wrote Janedocket. Among the secret cases was one who had served papers initiating divorce,” Evans, a senior information services analystinvolving two biotech companies, Moran he explained. for California courts in response to an in-said. In California, Moran noticed that data quiry about secret dockets. “It was an eye-opening thing for us to collection companies were able to go back “That’s a good step forward,” said Mo-see that you could go to court and no one into the court’s file room. After asking the ran. “At the very least we should be able towould ever know,” he said. court, he discovered that these data collec- expect that anyone who uses the court that tors were part of the superior court re- there would be some record of their ac-Court reporters reveal searcher program, which allows individuals tion.”secrets of success to go back into the file room at set periods Even judges and attorneys were sur- of time. Moran applied to the program andprised by discovery of secret dockets in after passing a background check was ap-their jurisdictions. proved to go into the file room. Cases cited in this article: “I can assure that probably the majority Moran noticed that every time a case wasof our judges didn’t know about this [secret pulled, a card was put in its place with an Hartford Courant Co. v. Pellegrino, No.docket] until they read it in the papers,” explanation. Some of these cards said 3:03 CV 0313 (CFD) (D. Conn. filedtestified Chief Justice William J. Sullivan “sealed” and would identify only the case Feb. 21, 2003).before Connecticut’s Judiciary Commit- number and date. Moran wrote down all of John Doe v. Connecticut Bar Examiningtee. “And I never ran into it in the 19 years the sealed case numbers and went to the Comm., 818 A.2d 14 (Conn. filed Mayas a trial judge. And five years on the Appel- computer index to find out more about 12, 2003).late.” these cases. When he punched in the case Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court, 464 Rep. Robert Farr, a member of the Judi- numbers, sometimes the case would come U.S. 501 (1984).ciary Committee and an attorney who has up and sometimes he would get a message Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448handled more than 1,000 divorce cases, said that said the case file did not exist at all. U.S. 555 (1980).that he never requested his cases be put on After Moran discovered the secret court United States v. Ochoa-Vasquez, No. 03-secret dockets. files, he requested the case names and num- 11590-DD (11th Cir. 2003).SUMMER 2003 SECRET JUSTICE: SECRET DOCKETS PAGE 7
TAPPING OFFICIALS’ SECRETSThe Door to Open Government in the 50 States and D.C.The Fourth Edition of TAPPING OFFICIALS’ format, World-Wide Web (HTML) files, and otherSECRETS, the most comprehensive guide to open formats. The CD-ROM is both Windows and Macintoshmeetings and records laws in every state, is now compatible.available. The guides are available for: $100 for theCompiled by the Reporters Committee printed book; $49 for the CD-ROM; $10 forand based on the work of lawyers across the a state booklet (specify state).country who are experts in the area, theguide is available as a printed compendiumof all state outlines or in individual state Call the Reporters Committee at 703-807-booklets. 2100 or send a check or credit card information (including expiration date) toThe guide is also available as a CD-ROM 1815 N. Fort Myer Drive, Suite 900,containing searchable versions in Adobe Acrobat Arlington, VA 22209.I would like to order: NAME individual volumes at $10 each for the following states: ORGANIZATION STREET ADDRESS the complete compendium in one 1300-page bound volume for $100. CITY STATE ZIP the complete compendium on ❏ PLEASE SEND ME A PUBLICATIONS LIST. CD-ROM for $49. ✉ MAIL TO: THE REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS 1815 N. FORT MYER DRIVE., SUITE 900 ARLINGTON, VA 22209