PHOENIX (AP) — Hidden data embedded in electronic public records
must be disclosed under Arizona’s public records law, the state
Supreme Court said Thursday in a groundbreaking ruling that
attracted interest from media and government organizations.
The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision, which overturned lower
court rulings, is believed to be the first by a state supreme court
on whether a public records law applies to so-called
“metadata.”
“This is at the cutting edge — it’s the law trying to catch up with
technology,” said David R. Merkel, a lawyer for a municipalities
group that urged the justices to rule that metadata doesn’t have to
be disclosed.
Metadata can show how and when a document was created or revised
and by whom. The information isn’t visible when a document is
printed on paper nor does it appear on screen in normal
settings.
The Arizona ruling came in a case involving a demoted Phoenix
police officer’s request for data embedded in notes written by a
supervisor. The officer got a printed copy but said he wanted the
metadata to see whether the supervisor backdated the notes to
before the demotion.
“It would be illogical, and contrary to the policy of openness
underlying the public records law, to conclude that public entities
can withhold information embedded in an electronic document, such
as the date of creation, while they would be required to produce
the same information if it were written manually on a paper public
records,” Justice Scott Bales wrote.
Disclosing metadata shouldn’t be overly burdensome on public
entities, Bales wrote.
Arizona’s law generally requires governmental entities to release
public records, but they don’t have to create them to meet a
request.
A Washington state appellate court ruled last year that metadata in
e-mail received by a city’s deputy mayor was a public record.
Unlike Arizona’s law, the Washington law specifically says the data
is subject to disclosure. That case is pending before the
Washington Supreme Court.
The League of Arizona Cities and Towns and other governmental
entities filed briefs citing burdens of complying with requests for
metadata and urging the justices to uphold a Court of Appeals
ruling.
Meanwhile, media organizations, including The Associated Press,
cited the media’s watchdog role and asked the court to rule that
the public records law applies to metadata.
The Arizona decision likely will have a “persuasive effect” on
other states’ courts, said Dan Barr, an attorney who filed a brief
on behalf of the Society of Professional Journalists and other
media organizations.
“If there’s metadata in there, that’s public record,” he said.
The ruling also means requested electronic records must be provided
in that form rather than paper printouts, which makes them
difficult and costly to search, Barr said.
The opinion said some metadata, like other public records, could be
withheld for privacy or other reasons.