Privacy versus public access: An analysis of how courts balance these two competing social interests when government records are computerized

This research determined how federal and state courts balance public access against personal privacy when government-held information is sought in a computer format. How courts have balanced informational privacy and public access to non-computerized government records was identified first. That meant analyzing the legal bases courts have found for each right. This research then identified and evaluated the six factors that courts have used to balance these competing interests: (1) The nature and validity of the asserted privacy interest and the degree of the invasion of that interest; (2) The extent or value of the public's interest in disclosure; (3) The purpose or objective of the requester seeking disclosure; (4) The availability of the information from other sources; (5) Whether the government promised confidentiality; and (6) Whether it is possible to redact personal information so as to limit the breach of individual privacy. Regardless of whether paper or electronic copies of government records were at issue, courts applied the factors in much the same ways. Not surprisingly, however, judicial attitudes toward computers sometimes made a difference in the relative value given to the privacy interest. This dissertation identified a number of problems with the way courts resolve the conflict between individual informational privacy and public access to computerized government records. It makes a number of recommendations that, if accepted by legislators and courts, would better protect informational privacy while emphasizing the fullest responsible disclosure of government information in a computer format.