红杏视频

NEW YORK 鈥� In a landmark victory for judicial transparency, the New York State Court of Appeals reversed an Appellate Court decision in NYCLU v. New York State Office of Court Administration (OCA) yesterday, ruling that the administrative arm of the New York State court system, OCA, cannot blanketly shield its guidance to judges concerning how to interpret the law. As shown by the leaked , it is believed that these directives play a role in how pressing issues are determined by state court judges. The New York Civil Liberties Union and 红杏视频 have been fighting for these records for four years.

鈥淭his ruling is an unequivocal vindication of the public鈥檚 right to understand the workings of our judicial system,鈥� Daniel Lambright, supervising attorney with the New York Civil Liberties Union. 鈥淓very day, judges make decisions that have enormous impact on the rights and lives of New Yorkers, especially vulnerable communities. With so much at stake, New Yorkers deserve to know the influences behind judge decision making 鈥� and we鈥檙e gratified that the state's highest court agrees. Our judicial system is strongest when it is transparent and accountable to the public.鈥�

鈥淭he public has a right to know when the government urges judges to adopt its preferred interpretations of the law,鈥� said Terry Ding, staff attorney with the 红杏视频's State Supreme Court Initiative. 鈥淭hat is true whether those communications take the form of legal briefs filed by government agencies in litigation or legal memos from court administrators. We therefore welcome the Court of Appeals鈥� decision rejecting the Office of Court Administration鈥檚 blanket claim that, under the auspices of attorney-client privilege, it can advise New York judges in secret about how they should interpret the law.鈥�

The OCA is intended to be a non-partisan, administrative arm of New York鈥檚 court system that oversees operations, staffing, and day-to-day support for judges. But in July 2021, revealed that the OCA had a practice of issuing secret guidance to state court judges.. This included guidance affecting the adjudication of critical civil rights, including whether defendants in criminal cases are granted bail, whether courts can order people to be forcibly committed for mental health reasons, and whether to uphold due process protections for people accused of crimes.

In September 2021, New York Civil Liberties Union filed a expressing concern over the OCA鈥檚 secretive practices and requesting copies of all memos of this nature. The agency denied the request, so the NYCLU sued, arguing that the public is entitled to such guidance. The trial court then ordered OCA to produce its memos, agreeing with the NYCLU that the request was reasonably tailored and that the guidance is not privileged. The OCA appealed, and the Appellate Division reversed the trial court鈥檚 ruling. This ruling overturns that Appellate decision.

The ruling is available here: /cases/nyclu-v-oca?document=Opinion