I hate to have to do your homework for you:
Exemption 5 – Records Protected by Law (§92F-22(5))
An agency may withhold records (1) required to be withheld
from the individual by statute or court decision
(hmmmm-—can you read ? COURT DECISION! )
; or
(2) authorized to be withheld by constitutional or statutory
privilege. This allows agencies to withhold records such as
records sealed by a court order
(hmmm....”sealed by a COURT ORDER” ???)
, communications between the agency and its attorney, and records found to be privileged in litigation.
An individual has a right to correct or amend factual errors, misrepresentations, or misleading entries in his or her personal record. Part III sets out the procedures for correction.
THIS is the statute the State quoted in their response to me
Maybe you should read that AGAIN and let it sink in ! !
Yes I can. Unlike you, however, I read everything that is in a statutue. Like most birthers, you appear to only read what you want to hear and ignore what is inconvenient. Case in point:
"An agency may withhold records (1) required to be withheld from the individual by statute or court decision"
Yes, it says records may be withheld because of a court decision. But it also says they may be withheld by statute.
But being a birther, you ignore what you don't want to hear, and so you ignore the statutue part.
And that's a shame, because in the case of Obama's brith records, it is the state privacy statutue, not a court decision, that causes them to be withheld.
And this is true of anyone's birth records, not just Obama's.
Maybe you should read that AGAIN and let it sink in ! !
Talk about projection. You are the one who needs to read it, but this time, don't read it selectively. Read the whole thing, even the part that does not conform to your preconceived notions.