Posted on 04/25/2006 8:44:57 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
For the second time in two years, California lawmakers are pushing a bill that serves the interests of a billionaire who wants to privatize California's system of public courts and limit access to judicial records.
The billionaire, Ronald W. Burkle, is a former supermarket magnate and a big contributor to the Democratic Party.
--snip--
Two years ago, Burkle was unable to convince a judge to seal most of his divorce records, so he pressed lawmakers to hastily pass a law that would require judges, upon a party's motion, to seal any documents that mention a party's financial assets.
That 2004 law, pushed through by former Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, was clearly unconstitutional, and a state appeals court struck it down. Now Burkle is back. State Sen. Kevin Murray, D-Culver City, is pushing a bill, SB 1015, that seeks to similarly seal financial records in divorce cases.
Why should the public have access to such records? To start with, these are public courts. To determine whether justice has been fairly dispensed, the public needs access to all pertinent records. ...
--snip--
Murray and other Democrats claim this bill is not about Burkle. Instead, they say, it is an attempt to protect couples from identity theft and public release of Social Security numbers.
It's amazing they can say this with a straight face. Judges already have latitude to shield such information, and a judge did so in Burkle's case.
The bill's backers want to act as if they are upholding some lofty privacy principle, but the only principle at stake is the principle of fair and accountable courts for all citizens.
Lawmakers should be ashamed if they would abandon that principle simply to help a billionaire in his ongoing divorce.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
The prospect of having one's dirty laundry written into the public record is a powerful incentive for divorcing couples to settle the details of their divorce out of court. It takes up a lot of public resources for a court to decide who gets the plasma TV or who gets the kids on spring break.
Ping!
What do you think of this?
"For the second time in two years, California lawmakers are pushing a bill that serves ...The billionaire, Ronald W. Burkle..."
Where is the old media ?
.../s
Burkle's Law
The Dems gutted a Homeland Security bill to push this through for their Buddy Burkle. Favors bought and paid for. Warped priorities, as usual.
Why should divorces be treated differently than other public court actions? What about civil cases? What about IRS prosecutions? Burkle wants every mention of assets, liabilities, income, or expense to be redacted or documents sealed. I agree with the editorial that this law should be rejected if the courts are to remain accountable for all citizens.
What are you doing up so late? In JOCO KS, we routinely submit the division of assets as an exhibit which is then withdrawn. There are certain stats such as ss# and dob which are submitted with the petition on a separate sheet of paper which is destroyed at the end of the case. The Domestic Relations Affidavit now is routinely prepared with the ss# and account numbers partially Xed out. But it is still a risk which is why it's a good idea not to get into the court system.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.