A bill that would curb the ability of courts to impose secrecy orders on public health and safety information was favorably reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee last week. See the report (pdf) on the Sunshine in Litigation Act of 2011, August 2, 2011.
“Court secrecy prevents the public from learning about public health and safety dangers,” the Committee report said. “Over the past 20 years, we have learned about numerous cases where court-approved secrecy, in the form of protective orders and sealed settlements, has kept the public in the dark about serious public health and safety dangers.”
Such cases, many of which are cataloged in the report, have included “complications from silicone breast implants, adverse reactions to a prescription pain killer, ‘park to reverse’ problems in pick-up trucks, and defective heart valves.”
“This problem most often arises in product liability cases,” the report said. “In exchange for monetary damages, the victim is often forced to agree to a provision that prohibits him or her from revealing information disclosed during the case.” As a result, “the public remains unaware of critical health and safety information that could potentially save lives.”
To address the problem, the bill would require judges to consider the public’s interest in disclosure health and safety information before issuing a protective order prohibiting its disclosure.
The bill, which has been introduced repeatedly without success since 1994, was opposed by most Committee Republicans. (Senators Grassley and Graham supported it.)
In a minority statement appended to the report, the Republican Senators said the bill was unnecessary and would be counterproductive.
“Without the certainty that a protective order will be upheld, litigants will raise significantly more objections to litigation discovery in order to protect confidential information. Parties will be less willing to submit to discovery if they believe information will be disclosed to the public,” the dissenting Senators wrote.
“This bill would simply provide a tool to trial lawyers to conduct fishing expeditions and file frivolous lawsuits with impunity,” they said.
The bill was also opposed by the American Bar Association, who said the proposal was unwarranted and burdensome.
To empower new voices to start their career in nuclear weapons studies, the Federation of American Scientists launched the New Voices on Nuclear Weapons Fellowship. Here’s what our inaugural cohort accomplished.
Common frameworks for evaluating proposals leave this utility function implicit, often evaluating aspects of risk, uncertainty, and potential value independently and qualitatively.
The FAS Nuclear Notebook is one of the most widely sourced reference materials worldwide for reliable information about the status of nuclear weapons and has been published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists since 1987. The Nuclear Notebook is researched and written by the staff of the Federation of American Scientists’ Nuclear Information Project: Director Hans […]
According to the National Center for Education Statistics’ August 2023 pulse panel, 60% of public schools were utilizing a “community school” or “wraparound services model” at the start of this school year—up from 45% last year.