University of Iowa can shield 2007 assault arrest records, court rules

UPDATE: The University of Iowa will not be forced to release additional documents related to the 2007 arrests and handling of two Iowa football players accused of sexual assault after the Iowa Supreme Court on Friday issued a ruling siding with university interpretations of privacy laws.

In its ruling Friday, the high court reversed an earlier district court order directing the UI to produce documents requested by the Iowa City Press-Citizen. The UI never released the records ordered by the district court because it requested a stay on that order pending an appeal of the decision.

The Press-Citizen's original document request of the UI included reports of attempted or actual sexual assaults, correspondence to or from UI officials related to those incidents and email, memos and other records relating to those incidents after Oct. 1, 2007.

The news organization argued that the Iowa Open Records Act required the documents be made public. The UI argued that the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act requires some records, namely the ones at issue in this case, be kept confidential.

Although the Supreme Court sided with the UI in its request to keep its documents confidential, it did not remand the district court's decision to award the Press-Citizen $30,500 in attorney's fees because the university did not challenge that part of the district court order.

The incident that led to the lawsuit was the 2007 arrests of UI football players Abe Satterfield and Cedric Everson on accusations they sexually assaulted another student in a campus dorm room. Following a criminal investigation and criminal charges, Satterfield was convicted of assault with intent to inflict serious injury, and Everson was convicted with simple assault.

The incident also led to internal actions and responses by UI officials, external criticism of the UI and a special counsel investigation and report.

Following the Press-Citizen's initial records request, the UI released just 18 pages of documents, claiming thousands of other relevant documents were protected under Iowa's privacy laws. The Press-Citizen sued, prompting the UI to release an additional 950 pages of documents and an index for all the relevant records – including both the pages that had been released and about 2,000 more that were being withheld.

Friday's Supreme Court decision was close. Three of seven court justices dissented in the decision, stating they believe the records should have been disclosed.