Stopping secret justice

The wheels of government move so slowly at times that progress is imperceptible, especially when efforts are afoot to limit the powers of the bureaucracy.

That’s why the public can rejoice at the relative speed of the Nevada judiciary in righting the wrongs of sealed civil lawsuits, exposed by a comprehensive Review-Journal investigation only 11 months ago.

The newspaper’s award-winning series of stories determined that 115 civil lawsuits had been sealed from public scrutiny by Clark County district judges since 2000, primarily to spare wealthy and politically connected parties from embarrassment. These judges were under no obligation to balance a party’s request for concealment against the public’s right to have taxpayer-funded justice unfold in the open — in some lawsuits, jurists hid entire case files from inspection.

The justices of the Nevada Supreme Court immediately recognized the threat such practices posed to public confidence in the fairness of the judiciary, so they created a commission on openness and court records to study policy proposals and make recommendations on how to bring accountability to the process of sealing cases.

On Monday, rather than wait 60 days to enact new rules drafted by the commission, the high court voted unanimously to make them take effect immediately and apply to all current and future records.

Most important is the requirement that parties make a compelling argument for privacy or a threat to public safety before a case can be sealed. If a judge decides there is a sufficient basis to seal the case, there must be a record of the decision that includes the names of the parties, attorneys and judge involved. If a judge is granting special favors to campaign contributors or friends in the State Bar, the public will be able to find out.

Additionally, records cannot be sealed to conceal a public hazard. And any person can challenge a judicial order to seal a case and request that the documents be unsealed, so long as that request is filed within five years of a case being closed or an appeal being resolved.

“This particular initiative underscores the court’s belief in open government and our commitment to preserve the public nature of the business of the judicial branch, including its records,” said Chief Justice Bill Maupin.

The court deserves much credit for moving with dispatch on this issue and creating uniform standards for every judicial district in the state. Finally, the press and the public will have the tools to make sure justice isn’t done in secret.