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