What Happens in Iowa Stays in Iowa: A Framework for Implementing Changes to State Open Records Laws
Author | Susan P. Elgin |
Position | J.D. Candidate, The University of Iowa College of Law, 2013 |
Pages | 1677-1706 |
1677
What Happens in Iowa Stays in Iowa: A
Framework for Implementing Changes to
State Open Records Laws
Susan P. Elgin
ABSTRACT: Since the creation of open records laws in the 1960s, state
legislatures have continued to amend these laws to allow disclosure of an
increasing number of documents. However, state courts have split on how
these changes should be implemented. Some say that the changes should
apply only to records created after the change to the law, while others believe
that the changes should apply to all records in existence, regardless of the
date they were created. This Note examines the legal and policy
considerations states should address when deciding how to implement the
changes, including the principles of retroactivity, the purposes of open
records laws, the ease of fulfilling record requests, and the concerns imposed
by due process requirements. After performing this analysis, using a recent
amendment to Iowa’s open records laws as a case study, this Note concludes
that states facing this issue should consider adopting the prospective-only
approach, which applies the changes only to records created after the
amendment takes effect.
I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1679
II. BACKGROUND ...................................................................................... 1680
A. IOWA’S OPEN RECORDS LAWS: A CASE STUDY .................................. 1682
1. Iowa Code Chapter 22: Iowa’s Open Records Laws .......... 1682
2. Iowa’s Court-Created Balancing Test ................................. 1683
B. IOWA’S 2011 OPEN RECORDS AMENDMENT: SENATE FILE 289,
SECTION 10 ................................................................................... 1684
C. THE PRINCIPLES OF RETROACTIVITY ............................................... 1685
J.D. Candidate, The University of Iowa College of Law, 2013; B.A., The University of
Iowa, 2008. Thank you to Pamela Griebel of the Iowa Attorney General’s Office for her
guidance throughout the writing process, my parents and sister for their support, Matt McGuire
for his encouragement, and the editors and writers of Volumes 97 and 98 of the Iowa Law
Review for their excellent work on this Note.
1678 IOWA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 98:1677
III. STATE COURT APPROACHES TO CHANGES IN THE CONFIDENTIAL
STATUS OF OPEN RECORDS .................................................................. 1687
A. THE ARKANSAS PROSPECTIVE-ONLY APPROACH ............................... 1688
B. FLORIDA’S APPROACH TO RETROACTIVITY ....................................... 1690
C. THE HAWAII PROSPECTIVE APPROACH ............................................ 1692
IV. LEGAL AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS ADVOCATING FOR A
PROSPECTIVE-ONLY APPROACH ........................................................... 1695
A. THE ARKANSAS APPROACH IS DEMANDED BY THE PRINCIPLES OF
RETROACTIVITY ............................................................................. 1695
B. THE ARKANSAS APPROACH IS BETTER AS IT IS MORE FAITHFUL TO
THE PURPOSES OF OPEN RECORDS LAWS .......................................... 1697
C. THE ARKANSAS APPROACH IS BETTER AT ENSURING THAT OPEN
RECORDS REQUESTS ARE EASY TO FULFILL ...................................... 1699
D. THE ARKANSAS APPROACH IS OPTIMAL FOR LIMITING DUE PROCESS
LIABILITY ...................................................................................... 1702
V. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 1705
To continue reading
Request your trial