The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the public could review the court proceedings and issues involved in a Kansas suit over alleged unlawful prescription of pain relief medication. -db
The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
October 18, 2010
By Derek Green
The United States Supreme Court today denied the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press’ motion to intervene in a pending case but allowed a redacted version of the petitioners’ request for Supreme Court review to be publicly filed.
Earlier this month, the Reporters Committee requested to intervene in the case, In Re Grand Jury Proceedings, in order to gain public access to the Supreme Court filings in a case that involves a dispute over grand jury subpoenas in a federal investigation in Kansas. Although the lower court records are sealed, the case has garnered significant news coverage.
Siobhan Reynolds, one of the petitioners in the case, publicly discussed in 2009 that she and her organization, the Pain Relief Network, were issued grand jury subpoenas for records related to an investigation into the prescription of pain relief medication. Reynolds told the Associated Press that she believed she and her organization were being investigated because of their advocacy on behalf of a doctor accused of unlawfully prescribing pain medication. She also reported that she fought the subpoenas in the federal District Court in Kansas and lost, but planned to appeal.
In the Supreme Court, the petitioners asked for permission to file their request for Supreme Court review under seal in order to comply with any sealing orders from the lower courts, but with a redacted version available to the public. The Supreme Court’s order today grants the petitioners’ request, signaling that the public will have the ability to at least partially review an official record of the proceedings and the issues involved.
Copyright 2010 The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press FAC Content Use Policy