Learn more about our policy experts.

Media Contacts

Angela Bradbery, Director of Communications
w. (202) 588-7741
c. (202) 503-6768
abradbery@citizen.org, Twitter

Maggie Henderson, Press Officer (Global Trade Watch)
w. (202) 454-5108
mhenderson@citizen.org, Twitter

Barbara Holzer, Broadcast Manager
w. (202) 588-7716
bholzer@citizen.org

Sam Jewler, Press Office Coordinator
w. (202) 588-7779
sjewler@citizen.org

Ben Somberg, Press Officer (regulatory matters)
w. (202) 588-7742
bsomberg@citizen.org, Twitter

Other Important Links

Press Release Database
Citizen Vox blog
Texas Vox blog
Consumer Law and Policy blog
Energy Vox blog
Eyes on Trade blog
Facebook/publiccitizen

Follow us on Twitter

 

March 12, 2010

Coalition Should Not Have to Disclose Internal Information to Receive Public Records, Groups Tell Texas Supreme Court

Requiring Groups to Provide Names of Members, Coalition Partners and Sympathizers to Obtain Public Records Will Have Chilling Effect

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A coalition of labor unions should not be forced to disclose information about itself and its associates to obtain documents under a state open records law, three groups told the Texas Supreme Court today.

In an amicus curiae, or “friend of the court,” brief, the groups – Public Citizen, Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas and Texans for Public Justice – urged the state’s high court to overturn a lower court’s ruling.
 
The dispute originated when the coalition Change to Win requested information under the Texas Public Information Act (TPIA). The coalition sought a copy of a contract between the Employee Retirement System of Texas (ERS) and Caremark, a pharmacy benefit management group, along with records related to the contract. The Texas attorney general determined that the documents were public records under the TPIA, which requires the release of public contracts.

Caremark sued the attorney general to block the disclosure of the contract and related documents, claiming that the records contained trade secrets. When Change to Win intervened in the lawsuit to protect its interest in the TPIA request, Caremark asked the court to order Change to Win to reveal its purpose in requesting the documents in this case and other contracts the coalition sought previously, as well as the identities of individuals and groups with whom Change to Win had communicated about such records.

Change to Win objected to Caremark’s demands, but the trial court and appellate court ruled that the coalition had to produce the requested material. Change to Win then filed a petition asking the Texas Supreme Court to hear the case. Today’s amicus brief was submitted in support of that petition.

“Texas law does not require a quid pro quo – requesters are not obliged to reveal something about themselves to obtain information contained in public records from the government,” said Margaret Kwoka, an attorney with Public Citizen who worked on the case. “The lower court’s order in this case flies in the face of the principles of open government embodied in the TPIA.”

The groups said that Change to Win should be able to receive the records it requested without having to disclose the inner workings of its organization.

“Public records should be made public on demand – regardless of who requests them or why,” said Craig McDonald, director of Texans for Public Justice. “Citizens demanding access to public documents should not be subject to government interrogation. These records belong to the people.”

Added Joe Larsen, a board member of the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas, “The trial court’s order threatens to undermine the protections for requesters of government information that are built right in the Public Information Act. If the Texas Supreme Court lets the order stand, any requester that dares sue under the act will face expensive and unnecessary discovery from governmental bodies and their vendors. This would be a devastating result for Texans.”

Forcing organizations to reveal their inner workings and communications to obtain government records that, by law, should be disclosed to anyone who requests them is not only harassing and irrelevant, it also compromises organizations’ right to freely associate under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, the groups told the court.

“If the ruling stands, it will have a chilling effect, not just on organizations that must maintain members’ privacy, but also on people who may want to request information through the TPIA in the future,” Kwoka said. “The public at large is harmed when requesters are not able to enforce their rights effectively because, as the TPIA states, government transparency is a public benefit.”
 
The groups’ brief is available at http://www.citizen.org/documents/ChangetoWinAmicus.pdf.


###

 

Copyright © 2013 Public Citizen. All rights reserved. This Web site is shared by Public Citizen Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation.
  Learn More about the distinction between these two components of Public Citizen.


Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation

 

Together, two separate corporate entities called Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation, Inc., form Public Citizen. Both entities are part of the same overall organization, and this Web site refers to the two organizations collectively as Public Citizen.

Although the work of the two components overlaps, some activities are done by one component and not the other. The primary distinction is with respect to lobbying activity. Public Citizen, Inc., an IRS § 501(c)(4) entity, lobbies Congress to advance Public Citizen’s mission of protecting public health and safety, advancing government transparency, and urging corporate accountability. Public Citizen Foundation, however, is an IRS § 501(c)(3) organization. Accordingly, its ability to engage in lobbying is limited by federal law, but it may receive donations that are tax-deductible by the contributor. Public Citizen Inc. does most of the lobbying activity discussed on the Public Citizen Web site. Public Citizen Foundation performs most of the litigation and education activities discussed on the Web site.

You may make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., Public Citizen Foundation, or both. Contributions to both organizations are used to support our public interest work. However, each Public Citizen component will use only the funds contributed directly to it to carry out the activities it conducts as part of Public Citizen’s mission. Only gifts to the Foundation are tax-deductible. Individuals who want to join Public Citizen should make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., which will not be tax deductible.

 

To become a member of Public Citizen, click here.
To become a member and make an additional tax-deductible donation to Public Citizen Foundation, click here.