Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Constitutional Law Blogs -> First Amendment Center
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Constitutional Law
: First Amendment CenterW.Va. high court orders release of petition signatures
By By The Associated Press,
First Amendment Cente
CHARLESTON, W.Va. Jefferson County?s clerk must release signatures sought by a newspaper from an Eastern Panhandle ballot petition, a unanimous state Supreme Court ruled last week.
The justices on Sept. 23 concluded that a referendum petition is a public record when filed with a public body. They also held that West Virginia?s Freedom of Information Act covers such records, ?even though the writing was not prepared by, on behalf of, or at the request of, the public body.?
The opinion makes both those findings legal precedents for West Virginia courts to follow in future cases.
The petition had put an unsuccessful referendum on the 2009 ballot to replace Jefferson County?s zoning ordinance. Before the vote, The Observer of Shepherdstown had a filed a FOIA request for the petition and signatures. County Clerk Jennifer Maghan refused to release the signatures, arguing that they were not a public record because they had not been written by a public body.
Last week?s decision reverses a 2009 ruling by Circuit Judge David Sanders dismissing the newspaper?s subsequent lawsuit. Embracing Maghan?s argument, Sanders also said that disclosing the signatures would violate the signers? privacy and chill the ability of citizens to petition government.
Rejecting those findings, Justice Menis Ketchum wrote that disclosing the signatures under FOIA ?serves a vital function in protecting the integrity of the electoral process and in promoting transparency and accountability in the ?conduct of the public?s business.??
The opinion also cites the June ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in Doe v. Reed that said people who sign petitions calling for public votes on controversial subjects don?t have an automatic right to hide their names. The justices brought up that ruling during a hearing for The Observer?s appeal earlier this month.
The Sept. 23 decision sends the case back to Sanders, directing him to order Maghan to release the signatures.
The Observer reported yesterday that since the high court?s ruling, Maghan had given the newspaper a certified list of the names of those who signed the petition. The paper also said it was expecting to receive the original petitions soon.
Full post as published by First Amendment Center on September 27, 2010 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Hayes Bicycle Group
Recalls Quick-Release Devices
Greka Oll and Gas
EPA Orders Clean-up of Toxic PCBs
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
Technician Whistleblower
Jury orders DuPont Chambers Works to pay $1.224 million settlement to employee.
Correctional Managers
Jury orders Marion County to pay $1 million racial discrimination settlement to two former employees.

Utah Supreme Court: Online petition signatures OK
Utah Supreme Court to hear fight over electronic signatures
GAME-Backed Petition for R18+ Draws Huge Response
Today at the Supreme Court | 10.14.08
Today at the Supreme Court | 11.2.08
Today at the Supreme Court | 11.10.08







