Opinion ID: 2646880
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Public interest in the admissions database

Text: Applying the principles discussed above, the admissions database falls into the “marginal” third category of records identified in Copley Press. The admissions database does not constitute an official record of the State Bar‟s actions and has not historically been treated as a public record. On the other hand, the admissions database does not fall into the category of preliminary, predecisional materials whose disclosure could undermine the purposes for which they were created and which could be misleading or inaccurate. The admissions database could be characterized as “preliminary” in that it constitutes the rough data upon which the bar‟s published statistical reports and other studies are based. Unlike a rough draft or internal memo, however, we have no reason to believe that it is inaccurate or misleading, or that its disclosure would interfere with the State Bar‟s use of it for its own purposes. The threshold consideration in determining whether these records are subject to public disclosure is the public interest that would be served by disclosure. In making that determination, the particular motive of the party seeking the information is not the relevant interest. (Connell v. Superior Court 1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 601, 616 [applying exemption to CPRA for cases in which public interest in disclosure is outweighed by other interests]; see also Department 30 of Defense v. FLRA (1994) 510 U.S. 487, 495-496 [applying exemption to Freedom of Information Act applicable to cases in which public interest in disclosure is outweighed by other interests].) Rather, we focus on “whether disclosure would contribute significantly to public understanding of government activities.” (City of San Jose v. Superior Court (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 1008, 1018; accord, Department of Defense v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, supra, at pp. 495-496.) Thus, although plaintiff Sander‟s motive in seeking the information is to facilitate his research regarding law school admissions practices, we focus on the interest of the general public in the activities of the State Bar. The public does have a legitimate interest in the activities of the State Bar in administering the bar exam and the admissions process. In particular, it seems beyond dispute that the public has a legitimate interest in whether different groups of applicants, based on race, sex or ethnicity, perform differently on the bar examination and whether any disparities in performance are the result of the admissions process or of other factors. Indeed, the State Bar uses the database to prepare a statistical analysis of the bar exam that reports the bar passage rates for various categories of applicants. Public access to the admissions database used by the State Bar to evaluate its admissions process would allow the public to independently ascertain and evaluate that process. Therefore, the public‟s interest in the information in the database would contribute to the public‟s understanding of the State Bar‟s admissions activities, and is sufficient to warrant further consideration of whether any countervailing consideration weighs against public access.