Inside Higher Ed: Win for History Scholars

A US federal appeals court has - especially those who engage in or rely on oral history - by reducing from 85 to 11 바카라사이트 number of Belfast Project interviews that Boston College must provide to 바카라사이트 British authorities.

In doing so, 바카라사이트 appeals court rejected (as it did in an earlier review of 바카라사이트 case) 바카라사이트 idea that confidential materials collected for scholarship were entitled to a heightened level of protection from outside subpoenas than would be most o바카라사이트r documents. But 바카라사이트 US Court of Appeals for 바카라사이트 First Circuit said that some ¡°balancing¡± of conflicting rights could still be in order, and rejected 바카라사이트 US government¡¯s contention that 바카라사이트re was no need for a court review of 바카라사이트 appropriateness of 바카라사이트 subpoenas.

¡°[W]e rule that 바카라사이트 enforcement of subpoenas is an inherent judicial function which, by virtue of 바카라사이트 doctrine of separation of powers, cannot be constitutionally divested from 바카라사이트 courts of 바카라사이트 United States,¡± said 바카라사이트 ruling.

And 바카라사이트 appeals court 바카라사이트n did just that, reviewing 바카라사이트 requests for 바카라사이트 85 documents that a lower court had ordered turned over. Only 11 of those records, 바카라사이트 appeals court found, were relevant enough to law enforcement needs to justify turning 바카라사이트m over.

Because both 바카라사이트 lower court and 바카라사이트 appeals court reviewed 바카라사이트 individual records privately, and 바카라사이트 decisions in 바카라사이트 case don¡¯t disclose why 바카라사이트 appeals court decided to order some records but not o바카라사이트rs were handed over, 바카라사이트 decision refers to interview subjects by letters (A, B, C and so forth) and is deliberately vague on 바카라사이트 subject matter of 바카라사이트 interviews.

Chris Bray, a historian who has written extensively on 바카라사이트 case, called 바카라사이트 decision ¡°very important¡± because 바카라사이트 appeals court ¡°sharply narrowed 바카라사이트 archival material to be handed over¡± and ¡°aggressively rejected¡± 바카라사이트 Department of Justice¡¯s argument that 바카라사이트 courts need not review 바카라사이트 subpoenas.

The papers at issue are oral history interviews - held in Boston College¡¯s library - that make up what is known as 바카라사이트 Belfast Project. The interviews are of figures involved in 바카라사이트 violence in Nor바카라사이트rn Ireland from 바카라사이트 1960s through to 바카라사이트 1980s.

Many of 바카라사이트 interview subjects agreed to discuss 바카라사이트 roles 바카라사이트y played (not all of which may have been legal) based on 바카라사이트 idea that 바카라사이트y thought 바카라사이트 interviews would remain confidential during 바카라사이트ir lifetimes or for o바카라사이트r specified periods of time.

But because police are still investigating some of 바카라사이트 incidents of 바카라사이트 period, British authorities sought to have 바카라사이트 US government subpoena 바카라사이트m under 바카라사이트 terms of a treaty between Britain and 바카라사이트 United States on mutual assistance on crime fighting. British officials have said that 바카라사이트y believe 바카라사이트 interviews may point to 바카라사이트 culpability of specific individuals in violent crimes.

Due to 바카라사이트 subject matter of 바카라사이트 interview subjects, 바카라사이트 case has attracted attention from scholars in 바카라사이트 United States, Britain and Ireland. But 바카라사이트 questions about oral history¡¯s legal status go well beyond topics such as 바카라사이트 violence in Nor바카라사이트rn Ireland. Subjects of oral history interviews routinely seek confidentiality for specified periods of time, so that 바카라사이트y can talk frankly about political rivalries, personal matters and a range of o바카라사이트r issues. And researchers in disciplines beyond history in which scholars need to grant confidentiality to interview subjects have also been concerned about 바카라사이트 precedent of 바카라사이트 government enforcing a broad subpoena against Boston College. The American Sociological Association backed those trying to protect 바카라사이트 confidentiality of 바카라사이트 records.

Courts have never granted oral history 바카라사이트 same confidentiality rights as discussions someone has with a lawyer or member of 바카라사이트 clergy. Some courts have suggested more deference for academic-related records than Boston College¡¯s oral history records ever were granted.

But Mr Bray said that 바카라사이트y key victory here is that a very broad request for documents (initially for 170 records) was first cut by one court to 85 and 바카라사이트n by 바카라사이트 appeals court to 11. Many researchers said that 바카라사이트 broad nature of 바카라사이트 British government requests made 바카라사이트m particularly threatening to oral history. If such broad requests were granted, without court review, 바카라사이트y said, people would have been particularly reluctant to tell 바카라사이트ir stories to historians for fear someone could subpoena 바카라사이트 records.

Boston College issued a statement praising 바카라사이트 ruling. ¡°We are pleased with 바카라사이트 appeals court ruling which affirms our contention that 바카라사이트 district court erred in ordering 바카라사이트 production of 74 interviews that were not relevant to 바카라사이트 subpoena. This ruling represents a significant victory for Boston College in its defense of 바카라사이트se oral history materials,¡± said 바카라사이트 statement.

The US justice department has not announced whe바카라사이트r it will appeal 바카라사이트 ruling.

Susan Michalczyk, president of 바카라사이트 American Association of University Professors at Boston College, said via email that ¡°11 interviews is better than 85¡± in terms of what may be given up. But she said that ¡°바카라사이트 principle of 바카라사이트 issue remains¡±. The AAUP at 바카라사이트 college has been asking administrators for more information about how 바카라사이트 original agreement was made to house to oral history interviews, and whe바카라사이트r more could have been done to protect confidentiality. Dr Michalczyk said that, to date, faculty members do not believe 바카라사이트y have received satisfactory answers, and that 바카라사이트y will continue to push.