BC-FOI-ROBERTS-COMMENTARY:MCT — op-ed (570 words)
Judge Roberts and presidential records
(ARCHIVE PHOTOS)
FOCUS ON FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
(MCT)
The selection of Judge John G. Roberts Jr. for a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court shines a light on one of the Bush administration’s most deliberate and indefensible attacks on accountability in government.
In response to President Nixon’s ceaseless efforts to hide White House audiotapes and other records from the public, in 1978 Congress passed the Presidential Records Act. That law unambiguously provides that the records of retired presidents are the property of the American people. Under its terms, retired presidents retain limited authority to block the release of certain materials for a period of 12 years after the end of their administrations. After the 12 years, retired presidents lose this privilege.
Roberts worked in the Reagan White House from 1983 through 1986. Records from his work in that position now reside at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, Calif. In an effort to learn more about the history and qualifications of Roberts, reporters have sought to examine these records. According to one, the Reagan Library “lists hundreds of files prepared by Mr. Roberts on subjects ranging from the Abscam bribery scandal to humanitarian assistance to Nicaragua. About 4,200 pages of the files are available to the public, but the vast majority of his documents, numbering in the tens of thousands or more, are still awaiting processing.”
“Awaiting processing?” What’s the problem, you might ask. This stuff is 20 years old. The problem is most likely an Executive Order issued by President Bush in November 2001 blocking the intended operation of the law.
The Bush order grants authority to retired presidents, vice presidents and to their representatives to block disclosure of documents after the 12-year term expires. Former President Reagan passed away a year ago. Under the Bush order, it appears that Nancy Reagan or her designee currently hold veto power over the release of these documents.
The Bush order was challenged in court by a coalition of historians’ associations and other public-interest groups immediately after it was issued in November 2001. As this is written, the case remains pending before Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in Washington.
In the words of Professor Bruce Montgomery of the University of Colorado, Bush’s order “eviscerated the PRA altogether.”
Now members of the Senate Judiciary Committee must fight for access to records concerning a candidate for a lifetime position on our nation’s highest court. But an important part of this battle was resolved by the Congress in 1978, when it passed a law granting all Americans the right to examine these documents. The battle over documents that should have been released years ago is a concrete example of how a policy of maximum secrecy is damaging to American democracy.
———
ABOUT THE WRITER
Lawrence Repeta is a professor of U.S. law at Omiya Law School in Japan and a founding director of Information Clearinghouse Japan. Readers may write to him at: 4-333-13 Sakuragi-cho, Omiya-ku Saitama-shi, Japan 330-0854; Web site: www.omiyalaw.jp.
This essay is available to McClatchy-Tribune News Service
subscribers. McClatchy-Tribune did not subsidize the writing of this
column; the opinions are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent
the views of McClatchy-Tribune or its editors.
———
© 2005, Lawrence Repeta
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services
—————
ARCHIVE PHOTOS on MCT Direct (from MCT Photo Service, 202-383-6099): John G. Roberts Jr.