EDITORS' CORNER
Ruling strengthens ‘government transparency in Arizona,’ attorney says
The Arizona Supreme Court sided with a professor seeking public records from the University of Arizona, strengthening transparency protections for citizens.
The Court ruled that judges must independently review whether a government agency actually has a legal right to keep records secret, rather than just trusting the agency’s word.
Further, it decided that if a government office deletes or destroys a record after someone has already asked for it, that counts as illegally refusing the request.
Professor Matthew Abraham “submitted a series of public records requests to the University between November 2018 and September 2020 seeking information about ‘transparent appointment and hiring practices at the University,’” according to the ruling.
Citing privacy, the university withheld records and refused to give Professor Abraham an audio recording. Following a formal demand letter, the university admitted its mistake and promised a search, but still refused to release candidate names and later claimed the audio recording was gone.
After several months without progress, Abraham filed a lawsuit in September 2021.
Finally, in November 2021, the university handed the professor over 1,700 pages of records, many of which were duplicates. The Arizona Board of Regents then moved for dismissal based on missed deadlines, missing claims for damages, and the destruction of the audio recording.
Lower courts initially ruled that while the university had illegally withheld the information, it “cured” its actions by eventually handing over documents.
The professor then appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, which ultimately established a victory “for government transparency in Arizona,” according to Parker Jackson, a Goldwater Institute attorney.
“Relying heavily on its recent decision in the Goldwater Institute’s own public records case against the City of Phoenix, the justices reiterated that courts cannot just take the government’s word for it when it comes to records redaction and withholding,” Jackson wrote.
“Today’s ruling makes it easier not only for citizens to obtain access to records, but also to obtain legal representation if they need it, since they can recover those costs if they prevail,” he wrote.
Following the ruling, Professor Abraham celebrated his victory in a post on X.
“Never take ‘no’ and the government’s boiler-plate exemptions as the final answer. Fight to redeem your rights to inspect and copy records,” he wrote.
In a separate lawsuit filed by the Liberty Justice Center, Professor Abraham alleges that the university retaliated against him for opposing DEI hiring practices, banned him from faculty governance committees, and labeled him “problematic” after he filed those public records requests, The College Fix previously reported.
MORE: Federal judge strikes down Education Department rule stripping DEI grants
