Latest news with #AtlantaPoliceFoundation
The Guardian
05-07-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Top Atlanta cop consulted for tech firm providing surveillance software to city
A top Atlanta police department (APD) official worked as a consultant for a tech company whose software is key to the city's massive surveillance system, according to an investigation from Atlanta's office of ethics. The official's activities included meeting with police departments across the country about the company's products while also investing in the company and going on to serve on the company's board. With these actions, over a period of two-plus years, Marshall Freeman, the chief administrative officer for the APD, violated the city's public employee laws regarding disclosure and use of city property, as well as creating 'an appearance of impropriety', the investigation concludes. Freeman is appealing. The case is an example of how 'the corruption inherent in the Atlanta way of policing is getting exported across the country, with police departments and corporations, sometimes together with police foundations, expanding policing without public input or an interrogation of policing technology and its public safety benefits', said Ed Vogel, a researcher at Lucy Parsons Labs, a digital transparency research organization. Freeman was a top official at the Atlanta Police Foundation (APF) before starting work at the APD. Such private foundations exist in every major US city, with more than 250 nationwide, according to a 2021 report by research and activist groups Little Sis and Color of Change. They have been used to pay for surveillance technologies in cities such as Baltimore and Los Angeles without the contracts being subject to public scrutiny, according to the report. The ethics investigation, prompted by email queries and reporting from the Atlanta Community Press Collective (ACPC), a local digital outlet, took the city 15 months to complete. The resulting 313-page report obtained by the Guardian details how Freeman went from being chief operating officer at the APF, where he negotiated the private foundation's multimillion-dollar purchase of Fusus software and surveillance tech on behalf of the city's police department, to becoming the chief administrative officer at the APD while also working as a consultant for Fusus. Freeman also had a small ownership stake in the company and was listed online in early 2024 as a 'principal' on Fusus Inc's board in Virginia and, in January of this year, as a 'director' in Florida. Along the way, on 31 January 2024, surveillance tech company Axon bought Fusus for $240m; the company is now called Axon Fusus. Freeman consulted for Fusus for at least a year after starting work at the APD, crisscrossing the country in person and by email while repping the company, including conversations with police departments in Florida, Hawaii, California, Arizona and Ohio. Emails also detail plans to meet an investment company executive at steakhouses and lobster restaurants, and describing how the APD's system of tens of thousands of cameras worked, with Fusus software at its center. Freeman told ethics investigators that during these meetings, he 'focused on how APD utilized Fusus … rather than directly promoting or selling the product'. The police official/consultant's trajectory starts with seven years working at the APF, a backer of the controversial police training center known as 'Cop City'. As COO, he oversaw negotiations for the leasing of city land to the foundation in a forest south-east of Atlanta where the training center has recently opened, despite four-plus years of local and national opposition. Freeman also 'facilitated the purchase of Fusus technology for use by APD' while working at the APF, according to the report. The APD then hired him on 9 January 2023, where he began overseeing the daily use of that technology across Atlanta – a city with 'more [surveillance] cameras integrated [into one system] than any other place in the country', Freeman told investigators. Emails and meetings detailed in the report include Fusus public safety adviser Jack Howard asking Freeman in late February 2023 if he planned to attend the company's upcoming 'customer symposium' in Orlando, Florida, so he could introduce the Atlanta official to the Oak Brook, Illinois, police department chief. Freeman said he planned to go, was scheduled to speak at the event, and 'would love to meet him, and help!' On 10 April, Fusus customer success manager Austin DeClercq emailed Freeman, asking for his help with a new account with Birmingham, Alabama, police. Two weeks later, Fusus's chief revenue officer, Mark Wood, contacted Freeman, asking him to speak to Seattle police about Fusus. In May and June of that year, Freeman helped organize the Fusus Atlanta Client Symposium, scheduled for September. The summer and fall included requests for information and recommendations on Fusus from police departments in Savannah, Georgia; Sacramento, California; Aurora, Colorado; and New York City – to whom he wrote, 'We are HUGE fans of Fusus.' He also began a series of meetings at a hotel penthouse, Chops Lobster Bar and Hal's the Steakhouse with the Atlanta director of BlackRock, a multinational investing firm with offices in 70 cities that owns 8.2 % of Axon. In December 2023, a Fusus staffer introduced Freeman by email to a representative of Honolulu's police department. The staffer said: 'Marshall works with Atlanta PD has been instrumental in implementing Fusus across the Atlanta metro area [sic].' Freeman scheduled an in-person meeting with his Hawaii counterpart during a trip to the island he had planned for the following week. Sign up to Headlines US Get the most important US headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion A month later, on 23 January, Freeman filed a conflict of interest disclosure with the ethics office, saying he had 'a financial interest in a company being considered for investment and acquisition by Axon'. He didn't name Fusus, and indicated he would address the conflict by 'recusal from discussion and vote'. In the press release announcing Axon's $240m purchase of Fusus a week later, Freeman is the only police official quoted. He praises 'real-time crime centers', which in Atlanta runs on Fusus technology and uses video feeds and other data to monitor, prevent and respond to crime, according to promotional material. 'I wholeheartedly encourage all agencies to embrace this cutting-edge technology and experience its transformative impact firsthand,' Freeman is quoted as saying. There is no mention of his connection to Fusus. Freeman earned an undisclosed sum of money through the sale from his private equity interest of less than 1% in the company. The police official/consultant told the ethics office he didn't think he needed to file a conflict of interest disclosure with Atlanta during the previous year-plus because the police foundation had paid for APD's Fusus technology, not the department, 'and the company did not have an existing contract with the city', according to the report. Going from the private foundation to the public police department – and continuing a relationship with a private company – 'underscores the instrumental role APF plays in how APD operates', said Matt Scott, the executive director at ACPC. In a recently concluded lawsuit ACPC filed against the foundation for access to certain documents on Cop City under Georgia's public records law, a judge ordered the foundation to supply the records. In that case and the current one, the foundation 'wants to have its cake and eat it too – saying, 'We're private and therefore hidden from public scrutiny; we're not subject to open records or conflict of interest laws'', Scott said. 'And yet, [the APF] plays such an important role in how the police operate in Atlanta.' Freeman also told investigators he was 'done' working for Fusus – or Axon Fusus – when the purchase went through in January 2024. Nonetheless, records from Virginia and Florida show him being named to the board in both places months after that date. Freeman's appeal now puts the issue before the city's ethics board, which may take a while because it is lacking enough members to consider the case. The ethics office is statutorily unable to fine more than $1,000 per violation and Freeman faces a possible fine of only $5,000. The APD responded to questions from the Guardian with a statement from its chief, Darin Schierbaum: 'The Atlanta Police Department reaffirms our support for the City's Ethics Office … [and] we take every matter concerning employee conduct with the utmost seriousness. While this matter is under review … we trust that due process will prevail.' Neither Freeman nor his attorney responded to queries from the Guardian. Meanwhile, Freeman's actions across the country show how 'greater relationships between police and tech corporations continue reshaping how policing gets conducted', Vogel said.
The Guardian
03-07-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Top Atlanta cop consulted for tech firm providing surveillance software to city
A top Atlanta police department (APD) official worked as a consultant for a tech company whose software is key to the city's massive surveillance system, according to an investigation from Atlanta's office of ethics. The official's activities included meeting with police departments across the country about the company's products while also investing in the company and going on to serve on the company's board. With these actions, over a period of two-plus years, Marshall Freeman, the chief administrative officer for the APD, violated the city's public employee laws regarding disclosure and use of city property, as well as creating 'an appearance of impropriety', the investigation concludes. Freeman is appealing. The case is an example of how 'the corruption inherent in the Atlanta way of policing is getting exported across the country, with police departments and corporations, sometimes together with police foundations, expanding policing without public input or an interrogation of policing technology and its public safety benefits', said Ed Vogel, a researcher at Lucy Parsons Labs, a digital transparency research organization. Freeman was a top official at the Atlanta Police Foundation (APF) before starting work at the APD. Such private foundations exist in every major US city, with more than 250 nationwide, according to a 2021 report by research and activist groups Little Sis and Color of Change. They have been used to pay for surveillance technologies in cities such as Baltimore and Los Angeles without the contracts being subject to public scrutiny, according to the report. The ethics investigation, prompted by email queries and reporting from the Atlanta Community Press Collective (ACPC), a local digital outlet, took the city 15 months to complete. The resulting 313-page report obtained by the Guardian details how Freeman went from being chief operating officer at the APF, where he negotiated the private foundation's multimillion-dollar purchase of Fusus software and surveillance tech on behalf of the city's police department, to becoming the chief administrative officer at the APD while also working as a consultant for Fusus. Freeman also had a small ownership stake in the company and was listed online in early 2024 as a 'principal' on Fusus Inc's board in Virginia and, in January of this year, as a 'director' in Florida. Along the way, on 31 January 2024, surveillance tech company Axon bought Fusus for $240m; the company is now called Axon Fusus. Freeman consulted for Fusus for at least a year after starting work at the APD, crisscrossing the country in person and by email while repping the company, including conversations with police departments in Florida, Hawaii, California, Arizona and Ohio. Emails also detail plans to meet an investment company executive at steakhouses and lobster restaurants, and describing how the APD's system of tens of thousands of cameras worked, with Fusus software at its center. Freeman told ethics investigators that during these meetings, he 'focused on how APD utilized Fusus … rather than directly promoting or selling the product'. The police official/consultant's trajectory starts with seven years working at the APF, a backer of the controversial police training center known as 'Cop City'. As COO, he oversaw negotiations for the leasing of city land to the foundation in a forest south-east of Atlanta where the training center has recently opened, despite four-plus years of local and national opposition. Freeman also 'facilitated the purchase of Fusus technology for use by APD' while working at the APF, according to the report. The APD then hired him on 9 January 2023, where he began overseeing the daily use of that technology across Atlanta – a city with 'more [surveillance] cameras integrated [into one system] than any other place in the country', Freeman told investigators. Emails and meetings detailed in the report include Fusus public safety adviser Jack Howard asking Freeman in late February 2023 if he planned to attend the company's upcoming 'customer symposium' in Orlando, Florida, so he could introduce the Atlanta official to the Oak Brook, Illinois, police department chief. Freeman said he planned to go, was scheduled to speak at the event, and 'would love to meet him, and help!' On 10 April, Fusus customer success manager Austin DeClercq emailed Freeman, asking for his help with a new account with Birmingham, Alabama, police. Two weeks later, Fusus's chief revenue officer, Mark Wood, contacted Freeman, asking him to speak to Seattle police about Fusus. In May and June of that year, Freeman helped organize the Fusus Atlanta Client Symposium, scheduled for September. The summer and fall included requests for information and recommendations on Fusus from police departments in Savannah, Georgia; Sacramento, California; Aurora, Colorado; and New York City – to whom he wrote, 'We are HUGE fans of Fusus.' He also began a series of meetings at a hotel penthouse, Chops Lobster Bar and Hal's the Steakhouse with the Atlanta director of BlackRock, a multinational investing firm with offices in 70 cities that owns 8.2 % of Axon. In December 2023, a Fusus staffer introduced Freeman by email to a representative of Honolulu's police department. The staffer said: 'Marshall works with Atlanta PD has been instrumental in implementing Fusus across the Atlanta metro area [sic].' Freeman scheduled an in-person meeting with his Hawaii counterpart during a trip to the island he had planned for the following week. Sign up to Headlines US Get the most important US headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion A month later, on 23 January, Freeman filed a conflict of interest disclosure with the ethics office, saying he had 'a financial interest in a company being considered for investment and acquisition by Axon'. He didn't name Fusus, and indicated he would address the conflict by 'recusal from discussion and vote'. In the press release announcing Axon's $240m purchase of Fusus a week later, Freeman is the only police official quoted. He praises 'real-time crime centers', which in Atlanta runs on Fusus technology and uses video feeds and other data to monitor, prevent and respond to crime, according to promotional material. 'I wholeheartedly encourage all agencies to embrace this cutting-edge technology and experience its transformative impact firsthand,' Freeman is quoted as saying. There is no mention of his connection to Fusus. Freeman earned an undisclosed sum of money through the sale from his private equity interest of less than 1% in the company. The police official/consultant told the ethics office he didn't think he needed to file a conflict of interest disclosure with Atlanta during the previous year-plus because the police foundation had paid for APD's Fusus technology, not the department, 'and the company did not have an existing contract with the city', according to the report. Going from the private foundation to the public police department – and continuing a relationship with a private company – 'underscores the instrumental role APF plays in how APD operates', said Matt Scott, executive director at ACPC. In a recently concluded lawsuit ACPC filed against the foundation for access to certain documents on Cop City under Georgia's public records law, a judge ordered the foundation to supply the records. In that case and the current one, the foundation 'wants to have its cake and eat it too – saying, 'We're private and therefore hidden from public scrutiny; we're not subject to open records or conflict of interest laws'', Scott said. 'And yet, [the APF] plays such an important role in how the police operate in Atlanta.' Freeman also told investigators he was 'done' working for Fusus – or Axon Fusus – when the purchase went through in January 2024. Nonetheless, records from Virginia and Florida show him being named to the board in both places months after that date. Freeman's appeal now puts the issue before the city's ethics board, which may take a while because it is lacking enough members to consider the case. The ethics office is statutorily unable to fine more than $1,000 per violation and Freeman faces a possible fine of only $5,000. The APD responded to questions from the Guardian with a statement from its chief, Darin Schierbaum: 'The Atlanta Police Department reaffirms our support for the City's Ethics Office … [and] we take every matter concerning employee conduct with the utmost seriousness. While this matter is under review … we trust that due process will prevail.' Neither Freeman nor his attorney responded to queries from the Guardian. Meanwhile, Freeman's actions across the country show how 'greater relationships between police and tech corporations continue reshaping how policing gets conducted', Vogel said.
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Atlanta Police Foundation ordered to comply with open records requests over ‘Cop City' documents
Illustration by Eric Wilson for Votebeat A Fulton County Superior Court Judge has ordered the Atlanta Police Foundation to comply with a series of open records requests filed by a group of reporters and researchers related to the Atlanta Public Safety Training Center, colloquially known as 'Cop City.' The foundation has 30 days to release 15 unredacted public records it had sought to withhold in a case closely watched by journalists and government transparency advocates alike. The foundation is a private nonprofit organization that raises funds for the Atlanta Police Department, helps with police recruitment and serves as the driving force behind the controversial 85-acre training facility that opened earlier this year after mass protests and crackdowns from the state. The plaintiffs, Atlanta Community Press Collective and Chicago-based research center Lucy Parsons Labs, had first requested records regarding the training center back in 2023. The requested records included APF board meeting agendas and minutes, budget documents, emails between foundation officials and Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr, and various contracts. However, they received no response from the APF, even as the foundation provided records to news outlets like the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and WSB. In a 12-page order released Friday, Judge Jane Barwick ruled that the APF's decision to withhold the records violated Georgia's open records laws, stating that 'records 'maintained or received by a … private person or entity in the performance of a service or function for or on behalf of an agency' are subject to the Open Records Act.' As a result, 'APF was under a duty to provide records to ACPC and Lucy Parsons Labs pursuant to the Open Records Act,' the ruling reads. 'Under the authority explained in this Order, no exemptions applied.' Barwick also emphasized that public records could not be withheld on the basis of which person or group requested them. 'Let the record also be clear that the identity of the requestor does not determine whether records are characterized as public,' she wrote. However, she declined to award attorneys' fees to the plaintiffs, reasoning that the police foundation did not 'knowingly and willfully' violate the Open Records Act. During a two-day bench trial in April, APF President and CEO Dave Wilkinson testified that he viewed responding to the records requests as voluntary, since he did not believe that the private nonprofit was subject to Georgia's open records laws. He also argued that releasing unredacted records could endanger the individuals named in those records by exposing them to harassment and threats from protestors. The press collective applauded the ruling, but condemned the multi-year battle it took to gain access to the records. 'While we're pleased with the result of the lawsuit, we're frustrated that it required a lawsuit to confirm what we already knew to be true: the Atlanta Police Foundation should be responsive to records requests regarding its operations for and on behalf of the City of Atlanta,' the community press collective said in a statement on the ruling. Joy Ramsingh, an attorney who represented the plaintiffs in the suit, also criticized the police foundation's initial refusal to provide the records. 'The fact that APF continued to fight even though the law was so clearly established against them, I think shows bad faith,' Ramsingh said. 'I think it shows a very political mindset on their part as opposed to a willingness to comply with the law.' The police foundation also applauded the ruling, saying it 'welcomes and celebrates Judge Barwick's court ruling as a clear affirmation of our role, our structure, and our ongoing commitment to public safety in Atlanta,' and that they plan to 'fully comply' with the plaintiffs' record requests. The issue of public access to government records has been an ongoing issue across the state in recent months. Last August, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that private contractors working for public entities are still subject to open records laws, and can be sent requests for public records they may possess. The ruling reversed an appeals court decision that government transparency advocates argued would shield certain public records from disclosure. The case also prompted new legislation aimed at clarifying Georgia's existing public records law. Under Senate Bill 12, which was signed into law by Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp earlier this year, requests for public records that involve a private entity must now go through the local governmental agencies that contracted with those third parties. Though a last-minute amendment sought to restrict public access from records of police officers' stops, arrests and incident responses, legislators in the House ultimately reversed the changes before advancing SB 12 to the governor's desk. ACPC Final Order SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Leaders behind building Atlanta Public Safety Training Center ‘surprised' by community pushback
The leader of the Atlanta Police Foundation says the newly opened Atlanta Public Safety Training Center will be good for the community, so he's surprised at the pushback it received. Of the $118 million price tag on the training center, $31 million came from the city. The rest came from Atlanta Police Foundation donors. Channel 2 investigative reporter Mark Winne sat down with President and CEO of the Atlanta Police Foundation Dave Wilkinson. [DOWNLOAD: Free WSB-TV News app for alerts as news breaks] 'The mission of the police foundation is to build a safer city to work closely with the citizens, the neighborhoods, the mayor, the city of Atlanta Police Department, all to create a safe city,' Wilkinson said. He says Atlanta has always prioritized making sure officers perform well and are trained well. 'If you combine better talent with better training, you get better outcomes on the streets of Atlanta,' he said. 'In most incidents of police brutality that you've seen around this country, it always comes down to, typically, a lack of talent or a lack of training by the police officers.' Keyana Jones-Moore says she was active in the movement protesting the construction of the training center. 'The police foundation was essentially pushing for something that the public did not want,' Jones-Moore said. 'I'm absolutely still opposed to Cop City.' RELATED STORIES: Atlanta Public Safety Training Center officially opens after years of opposition Diary of dead Atlanta Public Safety Center protester now core of new legal filings from Georgia AG Activists against new training center say city is blocking people's right to vote on project DeKalb DA withdraws her office from Atlanta Public Safety Training Center cases Activists face off with city leaders over plans for public safety training center More than 60 protesters named in RICO indictment connected to Atlanta public safety training center Wilkinson says the donation-funded, non-profit foundation often prefers a low profile, but became a target as the opposition ramped up. Jones-Moore says she didn't commit any acts of destruction, but hesitates to condemn those who did. 'There's no such thing as peaceful protest because protest in and of itself disturbs the peace of the status quo,' she said. Wilkinson says the community did want the center, which is proven by the more than $10 million spent meeting specific requests suggested by neighborhood leaders. [SIGN UP: WSB-TV Daily Headlines Newsletter]
Yahoo
10-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
A Key Fight Over the Most Infamous Police Project in the Country Is Coming to a Head
Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily. Last week, Dave Wilkinson, CEO of the Atlanta Police Foundation, took the witness stand in an Atlanta courtroom and argued that a local media outlet had no right to request his organization's records under Georgia's Open Records Act. Why? Because, he claimed, their coverage of the controversial police training facility known as 'Cop City' would be used to turn the public against the project and 'terrorize' the companies building it. In other words, the highest-paid police foundation executive in the country essentially argued that journalism is a form of terrorism. Wilkinson was in court responding to a lawsuit filed by the Atlanta Community Press Collective, a small nonprofit newsroom, and Lucy Parsons Labs, a transparency-focused research organization. The case represents more than just a fight over meeting minutes: It's a battleground for the future of transparency in public-private partnerships, where private actors are increasingly embedded in state functions—and using that status to shield themselves from public scrutiny. At the heart of the lawsuit is a critical question: Can the actions of the Atlanta Police Foundation—a private nonprofit—be considered public for the purposes of Georgia's Open Records Act? The plaintiffs argue yes, pointing out that APF runs nearly two dozen programs on behalf of the city of Atlanta, including the construction of Cop City—a sprawling, militarized police training facility in a metro Atlanta forest—and the development of the city's surveillance infrastructure. These are not peripheral projects; they are central to how public safety in the city is shaped and enforced. As such, they should be subject to the same transparency standards that govern public agencies. If the court sides with the foundation and allows its refusal to comply with records requests to stand, it could set a dangerous precedent—paving the way for governments to outsource core public functions to private entities shielded from public scrutiny. The story of Cop City is both deeply local and intensely emblematic of national trends. From its inception, the facility faced widespread public opposition, including mass protests, forest defense occupations, and hundreds of hours of oppositional public comment. It also faced accusations of secrecy and deception, thanks in large part to its funding model: a public-private partnership, or P3. The proliferation of P3s across the U.S.—from transit to housing to policing—has accelerated over the past decade. These partnerships are often sold as 'innovative,' but in practice they obscure decision-making, shift risk onto the public, and prioritize profits over public good. In infrastructure, that might mean a toll road built to maximize fees rather than access. In policing, it means a militarized force bankrolled by the private sector to protect capital, not communities. Originally, the city of Atlanta promised to contribute $30 million in public funds, with the remaining $60 million to come from private donors, funneled through the Atlanta Police Foundation. So, what is a police foundation? The short answer: a slush fund for police departments. The longer answer: Police foundations are the preferred vehicle for corporations and wealthy donors to bankroll the expansion, militarization, and surveillance capacities of police—outside of public budgets and beyond public oversight. Found in most major U.S. cities, police foundations fund everything from the very serious (the construction of training centers and surveillance networks and the purchase of military-grade equipment) to the kind of inane (sponsoring a police horse, or buying police dogs bulletproof vests, or, in St. Louis, funding the integral work of Operation Polar Cops, an ice cream truck run by police officers.) The donors are often a who's who of local corporate elites, often with business before the city. So while police already consume the lion's share of most municipal budgets, they also enjoy a second funding stream that comes with even fewer strings attached. Independent outlets in Atlanta like ACPC have stepped into a local reporting vacuum during the lengthy Cop City showdown. The city's flagship newspaper, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, showed little interest in investigating the project. The reason may be structural: The AJC is owned by Cox Enterprises, a major donor to the Atlanta Police Foundation through the James M. Cox Foundation. Its CEO at the time, Alex Taylor, was directly involved in APF fundraising. Despite claiming editorial independence, the AJC failed to disclose this conflict while publishing favorable coverage and opinion pieces supporting Cop City. ACPC, by contrast, used Georgia's open records law to uncover critical facts about the project's ballooning cost and secretive planning process. Its reporting revealed that the city quietly introduced an ordinance—later passed—that would increase public spending on Cop City to at least $51 million. That included a $31 million payment to the APF, plus a lease-back agreement worth another $20 million over 20 years. These revelations likely wouldn't have come to light without records obtained through Georgia's transparency laws. ACPC had initially accessed APF board meeting minutes by requesting them from the Atlanta Police Department—a public agency that was receiving the minutes from the foundation. But when APF stopped sending those minutes to the Atlanta Police Department, ACPC began requesting them directly from the foundation. APF refused. That stonewalling landed them in court. This might seem like a narrow skirmish over bureaucratic documents, but the implications are wide. In court, the Atlanta Police Foundation argued that it is a private entity, separate from the Atlanta Police Department, and therefore not subject to Georgia's open records laws. But the APF's role in the construction of Cop City—raising the funds, helping select the contractors, crafting communications strategy—looks very much like a public function cloaked in private legal status. This case echoes a troubling national trend: private actors increasingly exercising public power while avoiding public accountability. Consider Elon Musk's involvement in everything from federal transportation contracts to national security satellites. His companies shape policy and infrastructure in ways that affect millions, but as private enterprises, they operate outside of most transparency laws. That kind of shadow governance, enabled by P3s, friendly legislators, and a gutted regulatory state, is not a bug of modern governance. It's becoming the system itself. At the same time, across the country, state legislatures are quietly but deliberately weakening the open records laws that make investigative journalism possible. Lawmakers are introducing bills that narrow what qualifies as a public record, extend response times, raise fees for requesters, or exempt entire categories of information from disclosure. In some states, public agencies are allowed to simply ignore requests without consequence. In others, journalists have been sued or even criminally investigated for pursuing records. These efforts don't usually make national headlines, but they are part of a sustained erosion of the public's right to know—death by a thousand paper cuts to the First Amendment. The result is a chilling effect on accountability reporting and a growing opacity in the very institutions meant to serve the public. In the era of Trump 2.0, as power is increasingly concentrated and privatized, the deliberate dismantling of transparency laws isn't just a bureaucratic issue, it's a democratic crisis. Without access to documents, data, and deliberations, journalism becomes guesswork, speculation, or PR. Reporters can't hold power to account if they're forced to work in the dark. If journalism is democracy's rough draft, as the saying goes, transparency is the paper it's printed on. This case is about much more than a few withheld emails or board minutes. It's about whether the public has a right to know how power operates—and who is paying for it—when that power wears both a badge and a corporate logo.
