The state's Supreme Court will seek additional public input.

OKLAHOMA CITY -- The Oklahoma Supreme Court on Tuesday rescinded a controversial rule closing many online court records and redacting information from court files.

In a statement issued Tuesday, the court said it was aware of the privacy and identity theft concerns regarding personal data that may appear on the court's Web site, www.oscn.net.

"We are cognizant that many businesses and individuals rely on the information court clerks have placed on our Web site," the statement said. "Personal privacy balanced with reliable public information is critical for every free society."

The statement said the court is withdrawing its March 11 rule to give the issues further study and consideration. The rule was to take effect June 10.

The vote to rescind the order was 5-4.

The original order would have removed documents from the Internet, but left the docket sheet, or history of the case, online.

To get the supporting documents, a user would have to drive to the courthouse to obtain a paper copy.

The original order also removed Social Security numbers, dates of birth, financial account numbers, home addresses and other information from filings and had them placed under seal.

Critics said the new rules were drafted without significant public input and went too far.

They also pointed out that information to be redacted was available in other public records.

"We are pleased they have withdrawn the original rule," said Mark Thomas, executive vice president of the Oklahoma Press Association. "We would gladly serve on any task force to discuss the issue further.

"The original rule was too broad and thousands of Oklahomans and Oklahoma companies now realize the importance of those public court documents," Thomas said. "We do believe, however, that the public is concerned about Social Security numbers possibly being out there and that should be addressed quickly."

Nancy Lynn Roberts, owner and chief operations officer for Trak-1 Technology, a national, Web-based screening firm based in Tulsa, said she was thrilled with the decision to rescind the rules.

She said the decision means businesses can continue to obtain access to information they need to make good hiring and consumer credit decisions.

"The other side of it for me is that individual citizens who are trying to apply for jobs or housing can now be assured that there will not be problems of misidentification as a result of redaction of identifying information in records," Roberts said.

Joey Senat, past president of FOI Oklahoma and an Oklahoma State University journalism professor, agrees with the decision to rescind the original rules.

The group recently awarded the court its "Black Hole Award" for issuing the rules.

"My guess is they just didn't consider how many people relied both on the Internet access and on some of the information that would have been redacted," Senat said.

He said the decision was good for taxpayers.

"It is good to see public officials listen to the people," Senat said.

Senate Co-President Pro Tem Glenn Coffee, R-Oklahoma City, also said the decision was good for the people of the state.

"The court should be commended for its decision to maintain the convenient and open access to records to which the public is accustomed," Coffee said.

Barbara Hoberock (405) 528-2465
barbara.hoberock@tulsaworld.com

How they voted

Concurring in Tuesday’s Supreme Court vote to withdraw an order restricting public access to court records were Chief Justice James R.Winchester and Justices Marian Opala,Yvonne Kauger, StevenW. Taylor and Tom Colbert. Dissenting were Justices James E. Edmondson, Rudolph Hargrave, Joseph M.Watt and John F. Reif.

The vote was 5-3 on the original order earlier this month closing the court information.Taylor dissented, while Kauger and Edmondson dissented in part. Opala did not vote on the original order.