On Friday November 6, the Supreme Court announced that it has granted review of the Appellate Division’s decision in Gilleran v. Township of Bloomfield, in which the appellate court ordered Bloomfield to release videos taken by building security cameras. This will be the first time the Supreme Court will address OPRA’s exemptions for safety and security.

According to the office of the Supreme Court Clerk, the issue on appeal is: “Does the Open Public Records Act require the Township to disclose video recordings from a security camera surveilling the back of the Township’s municipal building (i.e., Town Hall)?”

As discussed here, in its opinion the Appellate Division recognized that there is a strong security interest in maintaining the confidentiality of this kind of video in general, but held that Bloomfield had not presented specific enough evidence of the security risk in this case. I suspect the Supreme Court’s decision to review this holding is based, in part, on the understanding that the supposed lack of specific evidence is beside the point–presumably, the security risk posed by granting release of such recordings does not significantly vary across the state.

The Supreme Court’s decision to take this case has far-reaching implications. Resolution of the specific question of access to building security camera recordings will have wide impact, as many public buildings throughout New Jersey have such cameras. And of even greater importance is the fact that the Court, for the first time, will interpret the legal standards governing OPRA’s exemptions for records affecting security. This will affect future public access to a variety of records, not just building cameras.