Diocese must release sealed abuse records


BRIDGEPORT, Conn. -- Officials from the Diocese of Bridgeport said they were disappointed with an Aug. 25 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court saying documents from settled abuse cases should not remain sealed.

After the ruling, made by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the diocese posted a statement on its Web site saying it intends to "ask the full U.S. Supreme Court to review the important constitutional issues that this case presents."

Ginsburg told attorneys in the case, Rosado v. the Bridgeport Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp., Aug. 25 that she was denying the diocese's request that the documents remain sealed until the high court decides whether to take up the case in the fall.

Each of the justices on the Supreme Court has responsibility for a region of the country and can issue a ruling in cases on an emergency basis.

The diocese wants to keep sealed more than 12,000 pages of depositions, exhibits and legal arguments in 23 lawsuits involving six priests from the Bridgeport Diocese. Most of the lawsuits were filed in the mid-1990s and they were settled in 2001 by the diocese for undisclosed amounts with the agreement that the settlements and the documents would remain sealed.

See the NCR content you're missing! Request a FREE sample of our print edition.

The battle over the sealed records began in 2002 when The New York Times filed suit to obtain the documents, describing them as a key part of the church's record of handling charges of clergy sex abuse. Three other newspapers joined in the suit: The Hartford Courant, The Boston Globe and The Washington Post.

In May, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled the documents should be made public. The 4-1 ruling involved the release of documents from the lawsuits settled in 2001. In 2006, a Superior Court judge ruled the files should be released but the diocese appealed the decision.

An appeal to the full U.S. Supreme Court would be the diocese's final attempt to keep the documents sealed. According to The Associated Press, the diocese is expected to file its petition with the high court by the end of August.

The high court usually doesn't decide which cases it will hear until the fall. The court decides to hear only a handful of the petitions it receives. In the meantime the diocese petitioned the high court to keep in place the stay on opening the records.

Diocesan officials said there is a good chance the court will take up the Bridgeport case because of two issues: the state Supreme Court's definition of what constitutes a legal document, and the church's contention that its First Amendment rights would be violated by the unsealing of documents that church officials produced with the understanding that they would be sealed forever.

In a statement, the diocese said the details of primary interest in the sealed papers -- such as the names of abuser-priests -- were made public in 2002 and 2003.

"The cases, and the settlement of them, were exhaustively reported on by the media," the statement said. "The attorneys and victims had access to the sealed documents at issue."

The diocese's petition for a writ of certiorari, asking the high court to review the case, is based on the argument that the Connecticut Supreme Court wrongly interpreted the U.S. Constitution's doctrine of "judicial documents" in presuming that all documents filed with the court should be accessible to the public and the media, the diocesan statement said.

The petition also raises the question of whether the state court's order to release the documents is a violation of the religious rights protections of the First Amendment.


NCR Comment code: (Comments can be found below)

Before you can post a comment, you must verify your email address at Disqus.com/verify.
Comments from unverified email addresses will be deleted.

  • Be respectful. Do not attack the writer. Take on the idea, not the messenger.
  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Stay on point. Comments that stray from the original idea will be deleted. NCR reserves the right to close comment threads when discussions are no longer productive.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report abuse" button. Once a comment has been flagged, an NCR staff member will investigate.

For more detailed guidelines, visit our User Guidelines page.

For help on how to post a comment, visit our reference page.

Commenting is available during business hours, Central time, USA. Commenting is not available in the evenings, over weekends and on holidays. More details are available here. Comments are open on NCR's Facebook page.



NCR Email Alerts


In This Issue

April 21-May 4, 2017