|
Texas: The Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA), which sets the ground rules for transparency in meetings of the state’s governmental officials, was challenged in federal court last month. The case, heard by US District Judge Robert Junell on March 25th, was brought by council members from twelve Texas cities – with the City of Alpine leading the challenge. This is the second time Judge Junell has upheld the constitutionality of the Open Meetings Act against a challenge from Apline council members in recent years.
Challengers to the Act not only feel that it inhibits First Amendment rights to free speech but that it is also “vague and confusing.” [1] Arlington Council member Mel LeBlanc explained: "As an elected public official, I am constantly in meetings where the issue of [the act] comes up, and nearly every time, each individual in the meeting has his own interpretation of this law. Thus we defer to city legal counsel for advice, only to be told that the answer is not clear.” [1]
Ultimately Junell ruled that the Open Meetings Act will stand. Junell wrote in his decision that "Open meetings enable public discussion and discourage government secrecy and fraud."[2] He went on to state "Governmental bodies have no First Amendment right to conduct public business behind closed doors. TOMA ensures that governmental bodies perform their duty, which is informing Texas citizens about public affairs." [3]
Junell ruled in favor of TOMA in a similar case brought by the same parties in 2006. The decision was appealed to the US Fifth Circuit, which dismissed the case in 2009 stating the case had lost its relevance because the challengers were no longer public officials.[4] The challengers say they are going to appeal again and there is a possibility the case could reach the US Supreme Court.[5] If that happens, the fate of the Texas Open Meetings Act could affect the fate of open meetings acts across the nation.
| 
Texas on Sunshine Review
