Description: Seeking disclosure of university records, including professors' emails, related to the climate change “hockey stick” and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
-
Board of Regents v. Court of Appeals Division Two
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 08/29/2018 Order Download Board of Regents' motions for stay of disclosure denied. Arizona Supreme Court Declined to Step in to Halt Disclosure of Climate Scientists’ Emails. On August 29, 2018, the Arizona Supreme Court denied motions by the Arizona Board of Regents for stays of the release of emails of two climate scientists in response to a 2011 public records law request by the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (then known as the American Tradition Institute). The court also declined to accept jurisdiction of the Board of Regents’ Petition for Special Action. 07/24/2018 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed in support of appellants by amici curiae Climate Science Legal Defense Fund, American Meteorological Society, Dr. Malcolm Hughes, Dr. Jonathan Overpeck, and Pfizer Inc. -
Energy & Environment Legal Institute v. Arizona Board of Regents
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 03/27/2018 Notice of Appeal Download Notice of appeal filed by defendants. 02/26/2018 Ruling Download Motion for new trial denied. Arizona Court Gave Arizona Board of Regents 90 Days to Produce Climate Scientists’ Emails Under Arizona’s Public Records Law. The Arizona Superior Court denied the Arizona Board of Regents’ motion for a new trial and request for further proceedings and findings in accordance with mandate in Energy & Environment Legal Institute’s lawsuit seeking to compel disclosure of the emails of two climate scientists at the University of Arizona. The court ordered the Board of Regents to produce all requested records within 90 days. 11/30/2017 Ruling Download Plaintiffs' motion requesting disclosure granted. Arizona Court Again Ordered Disclosure of Climate Scientists’ Emails. On remand from the Arizona Court of Appeals, the Arizona Superior Court again granted a motion to require disclosure under the state public records law of emails of two climate scientists at the University of Arizona. The Superior Court indicated that the Court of Appeals had mistakenly concluded that the Superior Court had not considered an exemption from the public records law for certain university records in its earlier decision requiring the disclosure. The exemption at issue applies to “unpublished research data, manuscripts, preliminary analyses, drafts of scientific papers, plans for future research and prepublication peer reviews.” In its ruling on remand, the Superior Court made explicit findings (1) that to the extent the scientists’ emails fell within this exemption’s scope, the exemption was inapplicable because “the subject matter of the documents has become available to the general public,” (2) that the subject matter of any emails that did not fall within the scope of the exemption also had become available to the general public, and (3) that disclosure of the emails would not be contrary to the best interests of the State. The Climate Science Legal Defense Fund, which filed an amicus brief in the appellate court in support of the scientists, today released a 50-state report on research protections in open records law. You can review the report here. 10/17/2016 Notice of Appeal Download Notice of appeal filed. Arizona Board of Regents Filed Notice of Appeal in Climate Scientist Public Records Case. The Arizona Board of Regents filed a notice of appeal a month after the Arizona Superior Court filed a judgment ordering production of previously withheld emails of two University of Arizona climate scientists pursuant to the State’s public records law. The Superior Court’s judgment was based on a June 2016 “Under Advisement Ruling” in which the court concluded that the potential chilling effect of disclosure did not overcome the presumption favoring disclosure. 06/14/2016 Decision Download Court issued under advisement ruling. Arizona Court Ordered Release of Climate Scientists Emails. The Arizona Superior Court ordered the Arizona Board of Regents to produce previously withheld emails of two University of Arizona climate scientists pursuant to the State’s public records law. The Board had asserted that it was entitled to withhold the emails from its response to a public records request from the Energy & Environment Legal Institute because the emails were prepublication critical analysis, unpublished data, analysis, research, results, drafts, and commentary. The court issued its ruling on remand from an appellate court decision that said the court had applied a too-deferential standard in an earlier review of the Board’s determinations to withhold the emails. In the new ruling, the court said it was cognizant of the concerns regarding the “chilling effect” disclosure could have, but it concluded that the potential harm was “speculative at best” and did not overcome the presumption favoring disclosure. The court indicated that the establishment of an “academic privilege exception” to the public records law was an issue for the legislature, not the courts. A blog about this decision appears here. 03/24/2015 Decision Download Ruling issued. The Arizona Superior Court in Pima County ruled that the Arizona Board of Regents did not act arbitrarily and capriciously when it denied access to more than 1,700 emails of two University of Arizona climate scientists. The emails were among documents requested by the Energy & Environmental Legal Institute pursuant to Arizona’s public records law. Based on a representative set of 90 emails, the court concluded that the Board of Regents did not act arbitrarily or capriciously or abuse its discretion when it withheld emails concerning prepublication critical analysis, unpublished data, analysis, research, results, drafts, and commentary on the ground that production of these emails “would have a chilling effect on the ability and likelihood of professors and scientists engaging in frank exchanges of ideas and information.” The court noted that the Board of Regents had provided “compelling” support of this position through the affidavits of scholars, academic administrators, and professors. 09/06/2013 Complaint Complaint filed. The American Tradition Institute, now known as the Energy and Environment Legal Institute, announced on September 10, 2013 that it had filed a lawsuit challenging the University of Arizona’s compliance with Arizona’s Public Records Act. The plaintiff contended that the University failed either to produce responsive records or to provide adequate detail about certain records it withheld regarding “the notorious global warming ‘Hockey Stick’, and the group that made it famous, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” -
Energy & Environment Legal Institute v. Arizona Board of Regents
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 09/14/2017 Memorandum Decision Download Memorandum decision issued reversing trial court and remanding for further proceedings. Arizona Appellate Court Sent Public Records Case Involving Climate Scientist Emails Back to Trial Court. The Arizona Court of Appeals reversed a trial court ruling that required that the University of Arizona produce emails of two climate scientists. The documents at issue were characterized as “prepublication critical analysis, unpublished data, analysis, research, results, drafts, and commentary.” The trial court issued its ruling on remand from an earlier appellate decision finding that the trial court should have conducted a de novo review of the university’s justification for withholding the documents. In its latest decision, the appellate court said that the trial court’s decision on remand did not refer to a section of the public records law providing for an exemption for “records of a university” and that the trial court seemed unaware of the existence of the academic privilege. The appellate court also said the trial court had not explained why the documents at issue did not fall within other exceptions to the public records law for unpublished research data, drafts of scientific papers, and information developed by university employees for which disclosure would be contrary to the best interests of the state. The appellate court remanded for further proceedings. 06/26/2017 Brief Download Reply brief filed by appellants. 06/02/2017 Brief Download Response brief filed by Energy & Environment Legal Institute. 04/28/2017 Brief Download Opening brief filed. -
Energy & Environment Legal Institute v. Arizona Board of Regents
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 12/03/2015 Memorandum of Decision Download Judgment for defendants vacated and remanded in part. Arizona Appellate Court Said Trial Court Had to Conduct De Novo Review of Board of Regents’ Justification for Withholding Climate Scientist Emails. The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled that a trial court had applied an incorrect standard to its review of a decision by the Arizona Board of Regents to deny requests for records of climate scientists at the University of Arizona. The appellate court said that the Superior Court should have reviewed de novo the Board’s justification for withholding emails addressing “prepublication critical analysis, unpublished data, analysis, research, results, drafts and commentary,” rather than determining whether the Board had abused its discretion or acted arbitrarily or capriciously. The appellate court remanded to the Superior Court, saying that it should weigh the Board’s determination that disclosure would be detrimental to the best interests of the state against the presumption favoring disclosure. The appellate court affirmed the Superior Court’s decision with respect to the Board’s withholding of emails that contained confidential information or attorney work product.