The First Modification Coalition is urging the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors to reject Sheriff Christina Corpus’ request to shut her August elimination listening to to the general public.
The nonprofit group argues that barring the general public and press from the proceedings would violate the First Modification proper of entry to judicial and quasi-judicial hearings. In a letter to the board, the group warned that approving a closed listening to may expose the county to authorized motion and monetary legal responsibility.
“Barring the press and public from the Removing Listening to as Sheriff Corpus has requested would violate the First Modification proper of entry to public proceedings, undermine a panoply of compelling public pursuits in administering the Removing Listening to transparently, and needlessly shut San Mateo residents out of a key part of a course of they voted to start in Measure A,” the coalition wrote.
The listening to is scheduled for Aug. 18–29. It follows the board’s June vote to take away Corpus from workplace — an authority granted to them by voters in a March particular election. The choice was primarily based on findings from a closed-door pre-removal listening to performed by Chief Probation Officer John Keene, who served because the listening to officer.
Corpus has requested the upcoming listening to even be closed, in accordance with a doc posted by the San Mateo County Superior Court docket. A county spokesperson beforehand instructed this information group the county was “evaluating the request” however has not but made a willpower or offered a timeline for a call.
In filings submitted June 27, Corpus’ authorized group argued the listening to needs to be closed “to keep away from public dissemination of supplies exempt from disclosure.” They cited provisions below the Peace Officers Invoice of Rights, which shields sure data involving officers below investigation.
Nevertheless, the First Modification Coalition stated these protections don’t apply on this case, because the data at challenge belong to the county, not particular person peace officers.
“(Citing the Peace Officers Invoice of Rights) doesn’t justify closing the Removing Listening to,” the First Modification Coalition stated, arguing that state regulation requires proceedings to take away an elected official be open to the general public, much like a court docket trial. It additionally famous that Corpus is an elected official, subsequently privateness protections shouldn’t apply.
“Neither statute cited by Sheriff Corpus can override the First Modification proper of entry that precludes blanket sealing or closure, particularly given the full absence of proof demonstrating a necessity for both,” the group added.
An earlier pre-removal listening to was additionally held behind closed doorways at Corpus’ request. Her attorneys had beforehand challenged the elimination course of in court docket, arguing that the board’s actions are unconstitutional, however a decide denied their request for a short lived restraining order.
Paperwork from the pre-removal listening to have been made public after Corpus’ authorized group didn’t ask the court docket to seal their submitting associated to the request for a short lived restraining order, in accordance with the county. Consequently, the court docket launched supplies that included particulars in regards to the closed-door proceedings.
“On this nation, it’s a first precept that the folks have the fitting to know what is finished of their courts,” the First Modification Coalition said. “We hope that, particularly given the County’s and Sheriff Corpus’s said curiosity in shifting ahead as transparently as doable, litigation is not going to be vital.”
Neither Corpus nor the county has responded to requests for remark.
