Wisconsin Department of Justice Logo
(WTAQ-WLUK) — The Wisconsin Department of Justice must release its list of all the law enforcement officers currently certified in the state.
Dane County Circuit Court Judge Rhonda Lanford rejected the DOJ’s arguments that releasing the list — which consists of approximately 16,000 names — would identify undercover officers, subject officers to harassment or put their lives in danger.
Lanford’s ruling is the result of a lawsuit brought by a pair of media organizations, The Badger Project and Invisible Institute, after the DOJ refused to provide officers’ names, birth years or ages, zip codes and work history, as the groups requested.
“Most states release this information, but have not experienced any significant problems caused by making the information public. The request did not ask for home addresses,” a statement from one of the groups’ attorney said.
Courts have ruled time and time again that speculative fears of harm do not justify withholding government records from the public. Government officials must do more than merely claim that, hypothetically, something bad might happen if the records are released. Rather, they must show that harm is likely to occur and is sufficiently serious to overcome the presumption of access to government records. DOJ could not do that here.
The Badger Project is a nonpartisan journalism nonprofit that focuses on and investigates government, politics and related matters in Wisconsin. Invisible Institute is a nonprofit public accountability journalism organization based in Chicago. Both organizations have litigated cases seeking police records and written extensively about law enforcement issues, particularly the problem of “wandering officers” who jump from agency to agency to avoid discipline.
In her ruling, Lanford wrote, “When responding to records requests, there is a strong presumption of openness and liberal access to public records.”
She went on to say, “[T]he DOJ has not met its burden to show that this is an ‘exceptional case’ warranting nondisclosure.” She concluded the DOJ’s refusal to release the list “was not the product of a genuine, case-by-case balancing analysis, but rather a habitual denial based on [its] past inability to garner compliance from local agencies.”
Comments