"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Better Courts for Missouri Demands Supreme Court to Stop Stonewalling Sunshine Request | Missouri Political News Service

Better Courts for Missouri Demands Supreme Court to Stop Stonewalling Sunshine Request

April 14th, 2009 by mopns · No Comments

Isn’t it ironic that the king of the sunshine request, Tony “Baghdad” Messenger, is conspicuously silent on the numerous sunshine requests that are simply being ignored right now by the Democrats?

In a letter delivered today, Better Courts for Missouri called on the Missouri Supreme Court and Mr. Thomas F. Simon, Esq., Chief Clerk and custodian of records for the Supreme Court, to stop dragging their feet in complying with the organization’s sunshine request for public records relating to the Court’s lobbying campaign against House Joint Resolution 10 and Senate Joint Resolution 9.

“Today we asked Thomas Simon, Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court and custodian of records to set aside all server backup tapes to ensure public records are not destroyed. It is our hope that the court will set the example in openness for other government agencies to follow by complying with our reasonable sunshine request,” stated James Harris, Executive Director of Better Courts for Missouri.

Missouri’s Open Records and Meeting Law, better known as the Sunshine Law, applies to all three branches of Missouri government. Better Courts for Missouri urges the Missouri Supreme Court to comply with the recent request, and requests that all information be made available in an expedient manner upon discovery.



Tags: MO Supreme Court · Tony Messenger

0 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Jim Byrne // Apr 15, 2009 at 12:00 pm

    Tony Messanger is a big proponent of protecting journalists, but the same cannot be said for that of journalistic integrity or duty.

    A few weeks back, I sent Tony an email. I presented some very basic questions. (see below)

    Why do we have freedom of the press?
    Why is it part of the Bill of Rights?
    Is it the journalist’s opinion that is protected, or is it the ability to present the facts?

    Do you think the press has a duty? If so; what is that duty?

    –To my disappointment; Tony did not provide an answer. Perhaps if he was to take the time to read Federalist #84, he would discover the reasons for freedom of the press.

    “It ought also to be remembered that the citizens who inhabit the country at and near the seat of government will, in all questions that affect the general liberty and prosperity, have the same interest with those who are at a distance, and that they will stand ready to sound the alarm when necessary, and to point out the actors in any pernicious project. The public papers will be expeditious messengers of intelligence to the most remote inhabitants of the Union. ”

    Our “public papers” have become partisan hacks. The only sense of duty they exhibit, is that which supports their own agenda.

Leave a Comment