SN, MSU back to square one in FOIA proceedings

The university and The State News are still at a disagreement when it comes to the public’s right to information after 2 1/2 years.

The Michigan Supreme Court has sent back a ruling to the circuit courts, where the lawsuit began, regarding the Freedom of Information Act dispute between The State News and MSU.

Conflicts between the newspaper and MSU began after the university refused to release an incident report for an assault in South Hubbard Hall that occurred in February 2006.

Herschel Fink, attorney for The State News, said that he is dismayed by how little has been accomplished in the case.

“It’s most unsatisfactory that, after the passage of two-and-a-half years, we’re still at square one on information that should’ve been newsworthy and released two-and-a-half years ago,” Fink said.

“We’re still fighting with a university administration that has taken an outrageous view.”

One MSU student and two nonstudents were charged in connection with the assault, in which a gun was pointed at three victims and one was doused with gasoline and threatened to be lit on fire. Since the incident occurred, the court has either convicted or dismissed the cases of all three suspects.

In the months following the assault, The State News requested a report of the alleged assault using the Michigan Freedom of Information Act. MSU denied this information on the grounds that the documents would inhibit the investigation and that the individuals involved had a right to privacy.

In the meantime, personal information regarding the assault was made public during court proceedings.

The state appeals court ruled that the passage of time may have made the personal information of those involved in the reports matters of public knowledge and passed the case on to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court sent back the ruling, saying that regardless of how much time passed after the FOIA was requested, the situation must be judged from the time of the university’s initial decision.

“We are pleased the court agreed with us that developments occurring after MSU’s FOIA response are irrelevant to a court’s review,” said Terry Denbow, vice president of university relations, in an e-mail.

Ingham County Circuit Court Judge Joyce Draganchuk sided with the university in the lawsuit in 2006, but her ruling was later revisited by the Michigan Court of Appeals. The lawsuit was referred to the Supreme Court after the university declined to settle outside of court.

Marty Sturgeon, general manager for The State News, said that an ultimately simple case has become a fight about the public’s right to make an informed decision about a situation.

“If this goes against us, it means you don’t have a right to know,” Sturgeon said.

The State News will continue to fight for the public’s rights to information, Sturgeon said. If the case goes against The State News, Sturgeon said, information across the nation will become filtered and censored.

“Freedom of information allows you as adults to make informed decisions,” Sturgeon said. “To not be able to is wrong.”

Justices recently ruled against the Michigan Federation of Teachers and School Related Personnel request that the University of Michigan release home addresses and phone numbers of employees.

The case, which is similar to State News v. MSU, could have an effect on the court’s decision, said Jane Briggs-Bunting, president of the State News Board of Directors and the School of Journalism director.

“That goes to the heart of our case,” she said.

If the court decides that MSU was right in withholding information, it would be a step backward, Briggs-Bunting said.

“Michigan would be out of sync with 49 other states in the U.S.,” she said.

Fink said it won’t be long until The State News and MSU representatives are back in the court, each fighting for what they believe is right.