1977
On February 18, the American Civil Liberties Union of Mississippi, Delta Ministry,
and civil rights activists Owen Brooks and Ken Lawrence file a class-action suit
charging state agencies with illegal surveillance of Mississippi citizens. Plaintiffs
call for the records to be opened, charging, "People have a right and, indeed,
a need to know what information the government has collected about them, how it
was and continues to be used, and by whom."24
1979
Judge Harold Cox, U. S. District Court, Southern District of Mississippi, Jackson
Division, dismisses the suit.25
1981
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reverses Judge Cox's ruling. 26
1983
Judge Cox vacates seat in April and is replaced by Judge William H. Barbour, Jr.,
of Yazoo City, Mississippi.
1984
Judge Barbour grants the ACLU access to the files for the purpose of discovery.27
1987
Judge Barbour divides the plaintiffs into two subclasses: access plaintiffs, who
seek unlimited public access to the records, and privacy plaintiffs, who want
people named in the records to have access but general access only after those
named have given consent.28
1989
On July 27, Judge Barbour rules that the Sovereignty Commission records should
be opened and maintained just like any other public records. He stipulates that
anyone named in the records may file rebuttal information. Privacy plaintiffs
immediately appeal.29 In a
related case on July 28, Hinds County Chancery Court Judge Stuart Robinson rules
that copies of Sovereignty Commission records in the files of the Paul B. Johnson
Family Papers curated at the McCain Library and Archives at the University of
Southern Mississippi (USM) are public records and should be opened. Accordingly,
these records are quietly opened by the USM archives.30
1990
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rules that Judge Barbour's order "did not adequately
take into consideration privacy interests of persons named in the files." The
Circuit Court directs the District Court to "devise a plan" to protect privacy
interests. 31
1993
At an evidentiary hearing in September, litigants including representatives from
MDAH outline their recommendations for the opening of the records.32
1994
On May 31, Judge Barbour releases a memorandum and opinion order establishing
a procedure by which the records may be opened without violating the privacy rights
of people named in the records. Privacy plaintiffs appeal.33
1994-1996
In accordance with Judge Barbour's 1994 ruling MDAH processes the records in preparation
for the privacy review-and-disclosure procedure, which will ultimately lead to
the opening of the Commission records.
1996
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upholds Judge Barbour's 1994 ruling. The lone
remaining privacy plaintiff, Ed King, appeals the decision to the U. S. Supreme
Court. On November 18, the Supreme Court declines to hear the case. All avenues
of appeal are exhausted, and the schedule for the privacy review-and-disclosure
procedure established by Judge Barbour's 1994 ruling goes into effect.34
1997
Privacy Review-and-Disclosure Procedure implemented by MDAH as follows:
January 20 and 27, 1997,
advertisements run in state and national newspapers inviting people who believe
that their names might appear in the records to write to MDAH; 987 people respond
during the 90-day period established by the court.
Each
of those respondents is mailed a questionnaire asking for information that would
help the Department search for the respondent's name in the records. The Department
receives approximately 700 completed questionnaires by the deadline.
Between
April 28 and August 15, 1997, archivists process these questionnaires, finding
that approximately 360 of the respondents are actually named in the records. On
August 15, the Department mails these respondents printouts generated from the
image database of every document in which their names appear, along with instructions
on how to declare their privacy options. Victims could choose from a list of privacy
options; these included the right to have personal information permanently redacted
(blacked out), to have any personal files permanently sealed, and to submit rebuttal
information. State actors could challenge their status only in court. In the copies
to be mailed to each of these respondents, the names of all other respondents
are temporarily redacted. The approximately 340 people who submitted questionnaires
but were not listed in the records are sent letters explaining that their names
were not found.
Of
the 360 respondents named in the records, 42 people select a privacy option. In
addition, the status is questioned of the records of three respondents who died
during the inquiry period.
1998
On January 13, Judge Barbour rules that all records not subject to further litigation
are open.35 Accordingly, on
March 17, 1998, the majority of the Sovereignty Commission records are made available
to the public on three computer terminals in MDAH search room. This is the first
time the records have been accessible to the public, and the opening attracts
considerable media attention. The records of the 45 privacy respondents, totaling
approximately 7,700 pages or 6 percent of the Sovereignty Commission collection
remain sealed.
1999-2000
The court adjudicates the legitimacy of the privacy requests. MDAH archivists
scan and make ready approximately 2,311 pages of rebuttal documents submitted
by ten privacy respondents. In addition, archivists electronically affix court-approved
permanent redactions to specified records.
2000
On July 31, a further 6,000 pages of Sovereignty Commission records are made available
in electronic format by MDAH in accordance with a ruling by Judge Barbour. This
release contains the court-approved redactions. In addition, this latest disclosure
includes 146 pages of rebuttal information submitted by privacy respondents.
2001
On January 18, with all litigation now completed, approximately 1,800 pages of
records are made available in electronic format by MDAH in accordance with a ruling
by Judge Barbour. This final release is the last stage in the privacy review-and-disclosure
procedure and includes the court-approved redactions. In addition to Commission
records, a further 2,165 pages of submitted rebuttal information are also opened
to the public.
2002
MDAH provides full text online access to the records via the agency's website.
