Supreme Court ruling makes public records harder to access

background checks – making access to such information very difficult, particlarly if the subject has a common name. “Businesses who are doing background checks are going to get multiple hits off persons who are not the person applying, but they’re not going to have a way to sort that out”, says Pat Davis of the Bernalillo County district attorney’s office. So while you are trying to perform an important check on one individual, you will receive information of any number of individuals with the same name, yet no way of discerning what data is relevant to you. While this new legislation has many opponents, Supreme Court Chief Justice Charles Daniels is not one of them. “We have no reason to be hiding things that are of important use to the public” he says, “but we do have obligations that have to balance”. It sems that this new ruling is going to receive much criticism among those who believe criminals should not have the right to such privacy, while human rights campaigners are sure to support the Supreme Court. It is another example of the issue regarding what the balance ought to be between maintaining privacy, while also ensuring safety. Is background screening the way to do this? Do we need to take away one, in order to allow the other? Or can they work side-by-side? This ruling may go a long way to providing us with an answer.]]>