Austin, Texas - “Elected officials, in their elected capacities, are not acting or speaking solely in their own rights, but as representatives of the voters.” That’s one of the fundamental legal arguments The Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas is making in support of Texas’ Open Meetings Act (TOMA) in a friend-of-the-court brief filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals in the Fifth Circuit.

A provision of TOMA allowing criminal sanctions of public officials, who hold meetings “in secret” or outside public view, is under legal challenge by several Texas officials. Previously, their contention that the criminal penalties violate their First Amendment Rights has been rejected: most recently by a lower court earlier this year.

On behalf of FOIFT, Houston attorney and board member Joseph Larsen also points out, that if you accept the officials’ argument, it “…would lead to the insulation of these elected officials from the constituency they represent.” Further, Larsen notes “…the public seeks only to know what these officials say and do when acting as a governmental body” and to deny that “…would mark a significant milestone in placing government in the hands of special interests whose influence and activities are most effective when they never see sunlight.”

A copy of the full brief can be found here or at http://www.foift.org/?p=2105