Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: curiosity

You could be right about that...I did notice the “statute” comment, but since the State has been extremely unaccommodating fulfilling ANY requests re: Obama (even index data), it is a foregone conclusion that BO has had SEVERAL ‘privileged’ communications with the State, which could involve a Court Order or obviously another arrangement whereby they are prohibited from disclosing ANYTHING regarding his vital records.

Further, if you read the statute below you will see that the State is obligated to (”Must always”) release records by virtue of the fact that they made ‘information available to the public’ by Ms. Fukino’s public announcements from last year AND this year.

Agency Records that “Must Always” Be Disclosed (§92F-12)

The Legislature created a list of specific categories of records that must always be disclosed. An exception only applies where it is referred to in that list. These categories of records, in summary, are:

(15) Information collected for the purpose of making information available to the public; (end quote of 92F12-15)

Ms. Fukino’s statement was based on “vital records maintained...by the Health Department” and in issuing such a statement, she is obviously “making information available to the public” as this was a public announcement. The law couldn’t be more clear on this, but again, in direct opposition to the laws governing the right for public access to such information, multiple requests have been REPEATEDLY denied !

Does not this appear to be evidence of egregiously recalcitrant behavior on the part of the State ?

How would you explain this ?


42 posted on 10/16/2009 11:17:10 AM PDT by rocco55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: rocco55
You could be right about that...I did notice the “statute” comment, but since the State has been extremely unaccommodating fulfilling ANY requests

Fukino & the governor have made it clear in their public statements that state law restricts public access to his (and everyone else's) birth records.

Further, if you read the statute below you will see that the State is obligated to (”Must always”) release records by virtue of the fact that they made ‘information available to the public’ by Ms. Fukino’s public announcements from last year AND this year.

I seriously doubt that that statute overrides the privacy statute. In general, and for good reason, privacy statutes trump everything else when it comes to release of information to the public.

44 posted on 10/16/2009 11:30:45 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson