IDOG

People who access court documents electronically from federal district courts through the PACER system pay 8 cents a page for the privilege, but until this spring, they got the first $10 worth of copies in a year without charge. Now, the Judicial Conference of the United States has approved a change: Users will not be billed unless they’ve racked up more than $10 in PACER charges in a quarter.

From Eye on Boise/The Spokesman-Review

McCALL, Idaho – More than 60 people gathered for the IDOG open meetings and public records seminar in McCall on May 19, 2010, the 22nd such seminar held around Idaho since 2004.

A government-accountability group says a southeastern Idaho school board held an illegal secret meeting over salary cuts.

The Idaho Freedom Foundation, a free-market advocate, vowed to lodge a complaint in state court against Pocatello’s District 25 school board, whose trustees held a three-hour executive session Saturday morning, followed by a vote to cut administrative salaries by 6.9 percent.

From the Associated Press

When the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week in the case of Doe vs. Reed, challenging Washington state’s practice of considering signatures on petitions for a referendum or initiative to be public record, the justices’ questioning showed much concern about openness and transparency; you can see the transcript here (hat tip to Randy Stapilus’ Ridenbaugh Press).

When the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals holds its first-ever sitting in Pocatello on May 24th, to hear oral arguments in two Idaho cases, it’ll make history in another way as well: Cameras will be allowed in the courtroom. Though cameras are allowed in courtrooms in most state courts, including Idaho’s, under established rules and at the presiding judge’s discretion, they’re banned almost entirely in federal district courts. That crimps TV coverage of federal court proceedings, and is the reason why major federal court cases result in paintings created by sketch artists in courtrooms being published in newspapers and on TV – because actual photos aren’t permitted. The 9th Circuit has been interested in the issue for years, and has allowed cameras in its appellate-level proceedings since 1991; the Pocatello sitting is the latest example. A pilot program also is in the works, at the urging of the 9th Circuit Judicial Council, to have federal district courts in the circuit experiment with permitting cameras in civil non-jury cases, though none have done so yet.

From Eye on Boise, The Spokesman-Review