Breaking: Argus Loses Governor's Hunt List Case Appeal
The Sioux Falls Argus Leader has lost its appeal to the South Dakota Supreme Court concerning the release of the list of invitees to Gov. Mike Rounds’ Governor’s Pheasant Hunts.
- Read KELOLAND’s Newspaper Loses Governor’s Hunt Suit
Excerpt:
A Sioux Falls newspaper has failed in its quest to gain access to the list of people invited to the annual governor’s pheasant hunt in 2005.
The South Dakota Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday against the Sioux Falls Argus Leader, which had argued that the list is a public record that must be released… .
- And read the Argus’ Supreme Court: Pheasant hunt list can be secret
Excerpt:
… The Sioux Falls newspaper appealed that ruling, saying the invitation list is a public record. It argued that state law didn’t give the secretary of Tourism and State Development the power to refuse public inspection of that list. The high court’s unanimous opinion said the newspaper’s remedy is with the Legislature… .
This is extremely disappointing but not unexpected. The trouble is with our laws not our courts. I’ll have more on this later today.
Todd Epp
PP at SD War College has a .pdf of the actual decision. Here’s the link: The Sioux Falls Argus Leader versus Hagen
6 Comments
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (6)
That is exactly right, Epp, and it is a concept that the Argus seems to have trouble grasping. The airplane "scandal" was a good example - you had to read deep into the article to learn that the Governor was following the law. I talked to more people who thought the Argus was accusing him of doing something illegal. Then the Argus turned around and backed a CHANGE IN THE LAW, acknowledging that they understood that the problem was with the law.
The Argus is even worse on these open government questions. They have the right to believe that the open records laws should be changed. But they constantly villify officials for FOLLOWING THE LAW. The Argus should concentrate on its efforts to change the current law, rather than casting aspirsions on officials who follow the law.
There are many examples of government officials who conduct business that's legal, but at the same time unethical or wasteful or not in the best interest of the citizenry.
Precisely the reason there are institutions such as the Argus Leader, willing to expose abuse of power.
Anon Post 2 seems to think public officials have an option of not following the law if they believe it's not in the best interest of the citizens.
Hmmm. There's a novel idea. Maybe Rounds will use that next. Or else, he'll just keep following the law.
And the Argus can suck my big giant new subscription to the RC Journal, a newspaper that at least takes more than 30 seconds to read.
I'm not ragged, just disappointed. Again. But not surprised.
Todd
Hey, as long as The Captains Of Industry concentrate on drinking and shooting at each other, and refrain (just for that weekend] from writing worker- and earth-hostile legislation, fine with me... the law is okay the way it is. I understand the need for confidentiality as long as we, the non-hunting body politic, get to give any deals the smell test before they are signed. (We HAVE had a chance to do just that on the Cabela's deal out here in Robbinsdale, and get to even vote on it on Sep 18, woo hoo! The people get a say--that's the way it should be.)
Back the the Hunt I REALLY care about (can't resist), Roger Hunt's sham "corporation" to hide political contributions was FLOUTING a law AND its pretty clear intent. I can't believe he's hasn't been forced to disclose -- 750,000 is a lot of moolah around here.