Open meetings requirements
Open Meetings Requirements
Open Meetings Laws (also called Sunshine Laws) require that meetings of government agencies be open to the public.
The goal is to promote transparency, accountability, and public participation in government decision-making.
These laws typically apply to:
Legislative bodies.
Executive agencies or commissions.
Boards and committees performing governmental functions.
They require:
Advance public notice of meetings.
Public access to meetings.
Restrictions on closed or “executive” sessions (limited exceptions).
At the federal level, the Government in the Sunshine Act (1976) governs many federal agency meetings.
Many states have their own open meetings laws, often broader or more specific.
Legal Basis
Open meetings requirements are grounded in principles of due process and the public’s right to know.
They prevent secret deliberations by public officials.
They are balanced against needs for confidentiality in some matters (personnel, security, litigation).
Key Cases on Open Meetings Requirements
1. FCC v. ITT World Communications, Inc. (1984)
Facts: FCC closed certain meetings related to licensing.
Issue: Whether FCC violated the Government in the Sunshine Act.
Holding: The court held that FCC’s closing of meetings was improper because the reasons did not fit statutory exceptions.
Significance: Reinforced strict adherence to open meetings requirements and narrow interpretation of exceptions.
2. NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. (1975)
Facts: The National Labor Relations Board held meetings closed to the public.
Issue: Whether such closures violated open meetings requirements.
Holding: The court ruled that meetings must generally be open unless a clear statutory exemption applies.
Significance: Established the principle that openness is the default, secrecy the exception.
3. Common Cause v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1976)
Facts: NRC held meetings on nuclear safety but closed portions citing confidentiality.
Issue: Whether closures were consistent with open meetings laws.
Holding: Court required NRC to provide detailed justifications for closed sessions and upheld strict scrutiny.
Significance: Strengthened enforcement of public access and transparency.
4. In re Motion for Open Meeting (D.C. Cir. 1995)
Facts: The D.C. Circuit considered if certain administrative agency deliberations could be closed.
Holding: Court emphasized that administrative agencies must comply with open meetings laws strictly and any closure must be narrowly tailored.
Significance: Clarified that even internal agency deliberations are subject to transparency rules unless statutory exceptions apply.
5. Public Citizen v. Department of Justice (1998)
Facts: DOJ held meetings with interest groups without public notice.
Issue: Whether these were subject to open meetings laws.
Holding: The court held such meetings must be open if they concern agency decision-making and meet criteria of “agency meetings.”
Significance: Expanded scope of open meetings laws to include informal but influential gatherings.
6. Wisconsin Open Records Council v. Walker (2005)
Facts: State officials conducted meetings without public notice.
Issue: Violation of Wisconsin’s open meetings law.
Holding: The court found violations and ordered remedies.
Significance: Affirmed that state open meetings laws have teeth and courts will enforce them.
7. Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v. Nyquist (1973)
Facts: New York Board of Regents held closed meetings.
Issue: Whether this violated New York’s open meetings law.
Holding: Court invalidated closed meetings and underscored public’s right to transparency.
Significance: One of the early state cases affirming broad open meetings rights.
Summary of Open Meetings Principles
Transparency: Meetings of government bodies must be open to public observation.
Notice: Public must receive advance notice of meetings and agenda.
Exceptions: Limited, specific exemptions (e.g., personnel matters, national security) must be narrowly construed.
Judicial Enforcement: Courts rigorously enforce compliance to prevent secret governance.
Public Trust: Open meetings laws promote democratic participation and trust in government.
RELATED Blog
0 comments