Via FirstAmendmentcenter.org:

"Should “pajama surfers” get the same court records through their home computers that journalists or researchers get by digging and sifting through files at the courthouse? For those who say no, the distinction might lie in what the U.S. Supreme Court has called “practical obscurity."

In 1989, the Court, favoring a privacy boundary, suggested that there’s a “vast difference between the public records that might be found after a diligent search of courthouse files, county archives, and local police stations and a computerized summary located in a single clearinghouse of information.”

The Virginia Coalition on Open Government, among others, believes the opposite.

Responding to a proposal by the National Center for State Courts and the Justice Management Institute to develop a model policy on public access to court records, the Coalition decried the idea that some records, readily seen in person, are “too public” if posted on the Internet.

“The possible confidentiality of records should be based on the information contained within the records, not the medium on which they are recorded,” VCOG Executive Director Forrest Landon wrote.

Here is a brief summary of some recent developments in the public debate over whether court records should be subject to remote access."

To read the rest, including info on various related state and federal actions, click on over to FirstAmendmentCenter.org.

With thanks to Legaldockets.com.

-- MDT