{"id":3517,"date":"2015-08-29T10:57:38","date_gmt":"2015-08-29T15:57:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/?p=3517"},"modified":"2015-08-29T10:58:35","modified_gmt":"2015-08-29T15:58:35","slug":"wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/","title":{"rendered":"New Decision from West Virginia Supreme Court on Academic Freedom versus Freedom of Information Laws"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

The federal Freedom of Information Act (\u201cFOIA\u201d) and state open record law equivalents are designed to promote government transparency by allowing citizens to request copies of administrative records. Increasingly, they are also used to obtain otherwise private documents from government or public university scientists. FOIA laws can expose misconduct,[1]<\/a> but invasive FOIA requests can also have deleterious effects on academic research,[2]<\/a> including being used as a tool for harassment by groups seeking to distract, discredit, and even intimidate.[3]<\/a> Scientists operating in politically controversial areas, such as climate science, have been especially vulnerable to invasive requests \u2013 see here<\/a> and here<\/a> for examples where massive open record requests for climate scientists\u2019 personal files were ultimately shot down by courts.<\/p>\n

A recently published decision out of West Virginia illustrates this tension in the environmental health context. In its May 2015 opinion in Highland Mining Company v. West Virginia University School of Medicine<\/em><\/a>, the West Virginia Supreme Court confirmed that a \u201cresearch scientist at a public college or university is subject to FOIA because he or she is employed by a public body.\u201d The Court also stated that West Virginia\u2019s FOIA statute provided no protections for \u201cacademic freedom\u201d or for confidential peer review correspondence. The Court did rule, however, that researcher files could be protected from disclosure under a different, existing protection for \u201cinternal memoranda.\u201d[4]<\/a><\/p>\n

The case began in 2012 when Highland Mining Company submitted enormous West Virginia FOIA requests to West Virginia University (\u201cWVU\u201d), seeking virtually all documents related to the initiation, preparation, and publication of eight articles by environmental health Professor Michael Hendryx. These articles linked surface coal mining with birth defects, cancer, and other health ailments; several of the articles had been submitted in separate litigation contesting an expansion of one of Highland\u2019s surface mines. Dr. Hendryx said that, were Highland to get all his records, \u201cit communicates a chilling message to any academic working on any topic that the work belongs to any private company that asks for it\u201d and \u201cthat academics cannot engage in free discourse on ideas and research development knowing that every communication will end up in the hands of private interest attorneys.\u201d[5]<\/a> Highland, meanwhile, claimed it \u201cneeds this information in order to evaluate the validity of the studies themselves and the conclusions reached in the Hendryx articles.\u201d[6]<\/a><\/p>\n

WVU initially denied Highland\u2019s FOIA requests, asserting the documents were protected from disclosure.[7]<\/a> Highland initiated litigation, and pursuant to a court order, WVU ultimately produced over 2,000 documents, 119 of them redacted, and withheld an additional 772 documents. Another 200,000 documents were identified as \u201cpotentially responsive\u201d but WVU argued that further reviewing and producing them would be \u201coverly burdensome.\u201d[8]<\/a><\/p>\n

Highland argued that WVU was obligated to continue its review. Highland also claimed that most, if not all, of the 772 identified and withheld documents should not have been withheld because they did not actually qualify for any exemptions. The circuit court disagreed and entered summary judgment in favor of WVU, finding that WVU had, \u201cat this point,\u201d met its duties of reasonable search as well as properly protected the 772 withheld documents \u2013 in part, because the circuit court found that West Virginia\u2019s statutory \u201cpersonal privacy\u201d FOIA exemption encompassed an \u201cacademic freedom\u201d protection. Highland appealed.[9]<\/a><\/p>\n

On appeal, the West Virginia Supreme Court reversed the circuit court and held that WVU could not claim any protection for \u201cacademic freedom.\u201d While several recent decisions have held that academic research should be protected from open record requests (such as in climate science records cases in Arizona<\/a> and Virginia<\/a>), the West Virginia Supreme Court ruled that West Virginia FOIA exemptions \u201care required to be strictly construed, [and] this Court declines to create an \u2018academic freedom\u2019 exemption not specifically set forth in the FOIA.\u201d[10]<\/a><\/p>\n

Even for traditionally confidential peer review commentary \u2013 which WVU argued needed to be \u201ckept confidential in order to facilitate a candid exchange regarding a proposed article and its research\u201d \u2013 the West Virginia Supreme Court found there were no independent protections. Keeping a strict interpretation of the West Virginia FOIA statute, the Court held that peer review \u201crecords in question are not \u2018personal, medical, or similar files\u2019 that fall under the FOIA\u2019s \u2018personal privacy exemption\u201d because they are made anonymously and thus \u201ccontain no personal identifying information at all.\u201d[11]<\/a><\/p>\n

Nonetheless, the Court held that Dr. Hendryx\u2019s records could qualify for an existing \u201cinternal memoranda\u201d exemption, which protects internal documents that are \u201cboth predecisional and deliberative.\u201d Historically, this exemption has applied to documents \u201cprepared in order to assist an agency decisionmaker in arriving at his decision\u201d and that \u201creflect the give-and-take of the consultative process\u201d through evaluating possible alternatives. The Court noted that this traditional \u201cinternal memoranda\u201d exemption \u201cencourages free discussion\u201d and \u201cinsulates against the chilling effect likely were officials to be judged not on the basis of their final decisions but for matters they considered before making up their minds.\u201d[12]<\/a><\/p>\n

Consequently, the Court held the protection applied to documents \u201cgenerated before the publication of a research article to which it relates\u201d and that reflect \u201cProfessor Hendryx\u2019s deliberative, decision-making or thought process employed to arrive at the article\u2019s conclusions and ultimate publication.\u201d Specifically, \u201cdrafts, data compilations and analyses, proposed edits, e-mails and other communications, and peer review comments and responses relate[d] to the planning, preparation and editing necessary to produce a final published article\u201d were held to be exempt from disclosure.[13]<\/a><\/p>\n

Ultimately, the Court\u2019s protection of \u201cinternal memoranda\u201d does cover nearly all of Dr. Hendryx\u2019s files. However, the Court noted that there were documents at issue that \u201care post-decisional and\/or non-deliberative\u201d and therefore which were not eligible for protection.[14]<\/a><\/p>\n

In light of the fact that no documents could be protected under a separate academic freedom exemption, the West Virginia Supreme Court remanded the case back to the circuit court to consider reviewing whether \u201cany documents withheld by WVU\u201d were truly exempt from disclosure. Even more notably, the Court found that the \u201ccircuit court erred in finding the FOIA requests were unreasonably burdensome.\u201d Instead, \u201cHighland should have had the opportunity to taper its FOIA requests\u201d and potentially receive additional documents. Finally, the Court found that the circuit court must consider whether Highland could be considered a \u201csuccessful FOIA litigant,\u201d in which case, Highland is statutorily entitled to an award of attorney\u2019s costs and fees.[15]<\/a><\/p>\n

Commentary:<\/em><\/p>\n

Overall, this case continues the trend of recognizing that publicly funded scientists fall under both\u00a0the obligations and the protections of open record laws. However, the West Virginia Supreme Court\u2019s work to circumscribe academic research protections to fit within existing exemptions seems a less-than-perfect fit. In particular, the lack of protection for documents that are \u201cpost-decisional and\/or non-deliberative\u201d is concerning, because any post-hoc discussions of academic research or confidential communications not proven \u201cdeliberative\u201d are not protected under this rationale, even if they furthered academic free thought and expression.<\/p>\n

The case, which started three years ago, also illustrates the time and financial expenses that public researchers and their institutions may face. WVU had to pay for both attorneys and outside document review managers. And Dr. Hendryx has described Highland\u2019s FOIA requests as \u201c[J]ust ridiculous. . . . They\u2019re digging for whatever they can find. They\u2019ve made me waste a lot of time.\u201d[16]<\/a><\/p>\n

Lauren Kurtz is the Executive Director of the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund, which seeks to protect the scientific endeavor. \u00a0For more information, please visit www.climatesciencedefensefund.org<\/em><\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2015\/02\/22\/us\/ties-to-corporate-cash-for-climate-change-researcher-Wei-Hock-Soon.html?_r=2<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> https:\/\/www.thefire.org\/careful-reform-needed-to-reduce-state-foia-chilling-of-academic-activity\/<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> https:\/\/www.ucsusa.org\/center-science-and-democracy\/protecting-scientists-harassment\/freedom-bully-how-laws#.VduXuflVhHw<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> https:\/\/www.courtswv.gov\/supreme-court\/docs\/spring2015\/14-0370.pdf<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> https:\/\/www.statejournal.com\/story\/28222033\/highland-mining-wvu-to-argue-foia-case<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> https:\/\/www.courtswv.gov\/supreme-court\/calendar\/2015\/briefs\/march15\/14-0370petitioner.pdf<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> In particular, WVU argued that all documents requested were specifically exempted by West Virginia\u2019s FOIA statute, because they contained: 1) information of a personal nature; 2) information protected by statute; 3) internal memoranda; and 4) trade secrets.<\/p>\n

[8]<\/a> https:\/\/www.courtswv.gov\/supreme-court\/docs\/spring2015\/14-0370.pdf<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> https:\/\/www.courtswv.gov\/supreme-court\/docs\/spring2015\/14-0370.pdf<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a> https:\/\/www.courtswv.gov\/supreme-court\/docs\/spring2015\/14-0370.pdf<\/p>\n

[11]<\/a> https:\/\/www.courtswv.gov\/supreme-court\/docs\/spring2015\/14-0370.pdf<\/p>\n

[12]<\/a> https:\/\/www.courtswv.gov\/supreme-court\/docs\/spring2015\/14-0370.pdf<\/p>\n

[13]<\/a> https:\/\/www.courtswv.gov\/supreme-court\/docs\/spring2015\/14-0370.pdf<\/p>\n

[14]<\/a> https:\/\/www.courtswv.gov\/supreme-court\/docs\/spring2015\/14-0370.pdf<\/p>\n

[15]<\/a> https:\/\/www.courtswv.gov\/supreme-court\/docs\/spring2015\/14-0370.pdf<\/p>\n

[16]<\/a> https:\/\/www.publicintegrity.org\/2012\/07\/20\/9947\/study-finds-toxins-mountaintop-coal-mining-sites<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The federal Freedom of Information Act (\u201cFOIA\u201d) and state open record law equivalents are designed to promote government transparency by allowing citizens to request copies of administrative records. Increasingly, they are also used to obtain otherwise private documents from government or public university scientists. FOIA laws can expose misconduct,[1] but invasive FOIA requests can also […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1475,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5673],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-3517","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-litigation","7":"czr-hentry"},"yoast_head":"\nNew Decision from West Virginia Supreme Court on Academic Freedom versus Freedom of Information Laws - Climate Law Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"New Decision from West Virginia Supreme Court on Academic Freedom versus Freedom of Information Laws - Climate Law Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The federal Freedom of Information Act (\u201cFOIA\u201d) and state open record law equivalents are designed to promote government transparency by allowing citizens to request copies of administrative records. Increasingly, they are also used to obtain otherwise private documents from government or public university scientists. FOIA laws can expose misconduct,[1] but invasive FOIA requests can also […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Climate Law Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2015-08-29T15:57:38+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-29T15:58:35+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Lauren Kurtz\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@sabincenter\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@sabincenter\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Lauren Kurtz\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/29\\\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/29\\\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Lauren Kurtz\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/24391fadda6350506112790b673e59c1\"},\"headline\":\"New Decision from West Virginia Supreme Court on Academic Freedom versus Freedom of Information Laws\",\"datePublished\":\"2015-08-29T15:57:38+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-29T15:58:35+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/29\\\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1401,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Climate Litigation\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/29\\\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/29\\\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\\\/\",\"name\":\"New Decision from West Virginia Supreme Court on Academic Freedom versus Freedom of Information Laws - Climate Law Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2015-08-29T15:57:38+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-29T15:58:35+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/29\\\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/29\\\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/2015\\\/08\\\/29\\\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"New Decision from West Virginia Supreme Court on Academic Freedom versus Freedom of Information Laws\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/\",\"name\":\"Climate Law Blog\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/files\\\/2023\\\/02\\\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/files\\\/2023\\\/02\\\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png\",\"width\":2752,\"height\":260,\"caption\":\"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/sabincenter\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/24391fadda6350506112790b673e59c1\",\"name\":\"Lauren Kurtz\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\\\/climatechange\\\/author\\\/lkurtz\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"New Decision from West Virginia Supreme Court on Academic Freedom versus Freedom of Information Laws - Climate Law Blog","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"New Decision from West Virginia Supreme Court on Academic Freedom versus Freedom of Information Laws - Climate Law Blog","og_description":"The federal Freedom of Information Act (\u201cFOIA\u201d) and state open record law equivalents are designed to promote government transparency by allowing citizens to request copies of administrative records. Increasingly, they are also used to obtain otherwise private documents from government or public university scientists. FOIA laws can expose misconduct,[1] but invasive FOIA requests can also […]","og_url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/","og_site_name":"Climate Law Blog","article_published_time":"2015-08-29T15:57:38+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-29T15:58:35+00:00","author":"Lauren Kurtz","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@sabincenter","twitter_site":"@sabincenter","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Lauren Kurtz","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/"},"author":{"name":"Lauren Kurtz","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/person\/24391fadda6350506112790b673e59c1"},"headline":"New Decision from West Virginia Supreme Court on Academic Freedom versus Freedom of Information Laws","datePublished":"2015-08-29T15:57:38+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-29T15:58:35+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/"},"wordCount":1401,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Climate Litigation"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/","name":"New Decision from West Virginia Supreme Court on Academic Freedom versus Freedom of Information Laws - Climate Law Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#website"},"datePublished":"2015-08-29T15:57:38+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-29T15:58:35+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/08\/29\/wv-decision-on-academic-freedom-versus-freedom-of-information-laws\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"New Decision from West Virginia Supreme Court on Academic Freedom versus Freedom of Information Laws"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/","name":"Climate Law Blog","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization","name":"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2023\/02\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2023\/02\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png","width":2752,"height":260,"caption":"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/x.com\/sabincenter"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/person\/24391fadda6350506112790b673e59c1","name":"Lauren Kurtz","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/author\/lkurtz\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3517","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1475"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3517"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3517\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3517"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3517"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3517"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}