Lawmaker's Phone Calls - With court's OK, dispute over lawmaker's phone records drags on

By DAVID B. CARUSO
Associated Press Writer

A legislator who turned down a newspaper's request to look at his phone records, then gave the documents to the competition, will have to explain to a judge why he should be allowed to play favorites. 

By a split vote, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court revived a lawsuit by the Herald-Standard of Uniontown, which argued that Rep. Lawrence Roberts violated the newspaper's free speech rights when he refused to let a reporter he did not like examine records of phone calls made at taxpayer expense. 

At issue, the court said, was whether the Fayette County Democrat improperly retaliated against the newspaper because he didn't like its reporting. Roberts had offered to turn over the records only if the newspaper assigned a different reporter to the story. 

The justices declined to rule directly on that issue, but said the newspaper presented enough evidence to justify a trial. 

Herald-Standard attorney Charles Kelly praised the ruling. 

"Politicians don't have any right to tell us how we should run our newsrooms,'' Kelly said Friday. 

Roberts did not immediately respond to messages left at his offices in Harrisburg and Uniontown. A Philadelphia attorney who represented him in the case also did not return a phone call. 

The dispute dates back to 2000, when the Herald-Standard was probing how deeply Roberts had become involved in the operation of certain county agencies, and figured clues might be found in his phone records. 

Like other state legislators, Roberts bills the state for business-related calls he makes from his home or cell phone. The newspaper requested copies of the bills, arguing that since taxpayers were picking up the tab, they had a right to see who the lawmaker had dialed. 

Roberts initially said he would only make the records available if the paper had someone review them other than Paul Sunyak, the reporter that made the request. The lawmaker said he felt Sunyak had previously treated him unfairly. 

Later, Roberts said he would consider providing the records if the newspaper's lawyer first absolved him of any wrongdoing in connection with them. 

The newspaper refused both conditions. 

In the meantime, Roberts voluntarily provided the records to Herald-Standard competitors, including a local radio station. 

In allowing the Herald-Standard to proceed with its case, the Supreme Court delivered the newspaper a partial victory. In its decision, the court also said Pennsylvania's public records laws do not give journalists automatic access to legislative records. 

Under that rule, Roberts might have been within his rights to keep his phone records private, but by offering the documents to some reporters, but not others, the lawmaker opened himself to an argument that he had violated the Herald-Standard's right to equal legal protection. 

Herald-Standard Managing Editor Mark O'Keefe said it would be a mistake to allow politicians to control the news by dictating which reporters cover them. 

"It just goes against the grain of journalism,'' he said. ``We shouldn't be putting conditions on anything. If there is a story, we are going to report it, and we are going to report it fairly.''