That is a cost of being a STATE EMPLOYEE being paid by the TAXPAYERS.
As a TAXPAYER I absolutely have the expectation and the legal right to demand to know what STATE EMPLOYEES are doing with time and equipment funded with my tax dollars.
We may be coming at this from two different views, mine is that if you're a state employee consuming my tax dollars you have no right to "privacy" or any kind of shielding while you're on my dime.
I think our country would be in a much better spot if a whole lot of other people demanded what I do.
The STATE passed a law exempting certain types of communications for what seemed to it to be perfectly valid reasons. These emails were not released based on that law.
The STATE’s highest court has ruled against their being released.
On what basis do you think the STATE’s right to make such decisions should be overturned? Should a federal judge override state’s rights in this case?
I think a lot of conservatives get so focused on federal abuse of power that they forget states will not always make decisions they like either.
For instance, with regard to the Bundy case out in NV, is there any particular reason to think the case would be playing out much differently if the land was state-owned? Would a state agency not charge grazing fees? Is Nevada, where 90% of the population lives in cities, all that much more likely to respect the interests of rural people?