Cilek v. Office of the Minn. Sec'y of State, A18-1140
| Decision Date | 08 April 2020 |
| Docket Number | A18-1140 |
| Citation | 941 N.W.2d 411 |
| Parties | Andrew CILEK, et al., Respondents, v. OFFICE OF the MINNESOTA SECRETARY OF STATE, et al., Appellants. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
This case is about a Minnesota voter’s request for access to information in the Statewide Voter Registration System, which contains Minnesota’s statewide voter registration list. The case turns on the relationship between portions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. §§ 13.01, 13.607 (2018), and a provision of the Minnesota Election Law, Minn. Stat. § 201.091 (2018 & Supp. 2019). Reading together the plain language of these statutes, we conclude that registered Minnesota voters have access to "public information lists" as defined by law, as well as to information provided by the secretary of state. But the Legislature has restricted access to the other information sought by respondents. Accordingly, we reverse the court of appeals.
Minnesota has a "single, official, centralized, interactive computerized statewide voter registration list ... [that] constitutes the official list of every legally registered voter in the state." Minn. Stat. § 201.021 (2018). This list is contained in the statewide voter registration system, known as the SVRS. See Minn. Stat. § 201.081, subd. 1(a) (2018) (); see also Minn. Stat. § 201.022, subd. 1 (2018).
"The secretary of state is responsible for defining, maintaining, and administering" the SVRS. Minn. Stat. § 201.021. As presently defined and maintained, the SVRS is a database of records on each of the 5.42 million individuals who have registered at some point to vote in Minnesota, of which 3.26 million are currently registered. Each voter’s record in the SVRS has up to 19 data fields: full name; voter identification number; address; date of birth; phone number; e-mail address; driver’s license number or last four digits of a social security number; county of residence; election district information; registration status; basis for registration challenge, if any; registration submission method; original registration date; date(s) of updated registration(s); list of prior elections in which the voter voted; status as a voter whose data has been removed from a public information list to protect the voter’s safety; status as a recurring absentee voter; previous name, if any; and out-of-state previous address, if any.
The SVRS exists because Minnesota statutes require county auditors and the secretary of state to cooperate to build and maintain it. Under section 201.021, the county auditors are the chief registrars of voters and the chief custodians of their counties’ registration records. Under section 201.091, subdivision 1, each county auditor prepares and maintains a current list of registered voters in the county—the "master list." These lists are entered into the SVRS. Minn. Stat. § 201.091, subd. 1.
To maintain the SVRS as an "interactive computerized" list, Minn. Stat. § 201.021, the secretary of state and the county auditors work together to update the master lists, Minn. Stat. § 201.091, subds. 1–2. The "updated master list" for each precinct is prepared for absentee voting, and a "final corrected master list" is prepared for election-day voting. Minn. Stat. § 201.091, subd. 2. The Legislature has expressly limited access to the master list; "[t]he information contained in the master list may only be made available to public officials for purposes related to election administration, jury selection, and in response to a law enforcement inquiry ...." Id. , subd. 1.
The Legislature has allowed some of the information in the SVRS to be made available for inspection in the form of a "public information list." Id. , subd. 4. The statute spells out who has access to the public information list, for what purposes, and what information is on it.
The public information list is not generally available to anyone—it is only available to Minnesota voters. Id. , subd. 5. To inspect or acquire the list, voters must state in writing that they will not use "any information contained in the list for purposes unrelated to elections, political activities, or law enforcement." Id. , subd. 4. The information included on the public information list is: voter name (unless withheld for safety), address, year of birth, voting history, telephone number (if provided), and voting district. Id. Other voter registration information is not on the public information list.
The statute also contains special protections for certain kinds of voter registration information. Political party choice for the presidential nomination primary is "private data on individuals" under the Data Practices Act,1 but must be provided to the applicable political party chair. Id. , subd. 4a. Also expressly excluded from both the public information list and from a response to a law enforcement inquiry are "[r]estricted data": date of birth, social security number, driver’s license number, identification card number, military identification card number, and passport number. Id. , subd. 9.
With this statutory background in mind, we turn to the facts of this case. Andrew Cilek is the executive director of the Minnesota Voters Alliance, a non-profit organization concerned with government and electoral oversight. On July 21, 2017, Cilek, on behalf of his organization, sought from the Secretary of State "access to non-private government data" from the SVRS. His request included "[v]oter registration, status and voting history information on every Minnesota voter, whether active, inactive or deleted whom the secretary of state maintains or has maintained voter registration data from January 1st, 2016 to present." Cilek’s non-exhaustive list of data being sought included:
Cilek later clarified his request. He said that he did not seek data considered restricted under Minn. Stat. § 201.091, subd. 9 ; data regarding voters who, for reasons of safety, have withheld their information from public information lists under Minn. Stat. § 201.091, subd. 4 ; and data regarding voters who are participants in the Safe at Home Program.2
On August 1, 2017, the Secretary responded, informing Cilek that he was entitled to information in the SVRS related to currently registered Minnesota voters—essentially, the public information lists—including "voter name, voter address, year of birth of the voter, voting history, information on the voting districts in which the voter resides and is eligible to vote, and the telephone number, if available." The Secretary declined to provide the rest of the information Cilek sought. Specifically, the Secretary declined to produce SVRS information on voter status, the reasons for challenges to voter registration, and information related to individuals who were not currently registered voters.
Cilek sued the Secretary, alleging violations of the Data Practices Act and seeking injunctive and declaratory relief to compel production of the requested data. The district court granted summary judgment to Cilek, and ordered the Secretary to produce the requested data. The court of appeals affirmed. Cilek v. Office of the Minn. Sec'y of State , 927 N.W.2d 327 (Minn. App. 2019). We granted the Secretary of State’s petition for further review.
This appeal arises out of the district court’s grant of summary judgment. The facts are undisputed and summary judgment was granted on a question of law. As a result, our review is de novo. State v. Minn. Sch. of Bus. , 899 N.W.2d 467, 471 (Minn. 2017). The question of statutory interpretation before us presents a question of law that we also review de novo. Bruton v. Smithfield Foods, Inc. , 923 N.W.2d 661, 664 (Minn. 2019). The object of statutory interpretation "is to ascertain and effectuate the intention of the legislature." Minn. Stat. § 645.16 (2018). "If the intent is clear, we apply the statute according to its plain meaning." Fish v. Ramler Trucking, Inc. , 935 N.W.2d 738, 741 (Minn. 2019). "[W]e do not add words or phrases to unambiguous statutes or rules." Walsh v. U.S. Bank, N.A. , 851 N.W.2d 598, 604 (Minn. 2014).
This case requires that we interpret—and read together—portions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. §§ 13.01 –.90, and the Minnesota Election Law, as defined by Minn. Stat. § 200.01 (2018). The Data Practices Act "regulates the collection, creation, storage, maintenance, dissemination, and access to government data in government entities." Minn. Stat. § 13.01, subd. 3. It prescribes a general regime by which data is presumed to be public and accessible unless classified as "nonpublic or protected nonpublic, or with respect to data on individuals, as private or confidential." Minn. Stat. § 13.03, subd. 1 ; see also id. , subd. 3.
As the Data Practices Act makes clear in its opening section, however, this regime has its exceptions, including some not contained in chapter 13. Some of the Data Practices Act’s sections refer to—and, essentially, incorporate—statutory sections codified outside of the Act. Minn. Stat. § 13.01, subd. 5(a). Those sections perform one or more of three functions; notwithstanding the general provisions of the Act that follow, they "classify government data as other than public, place restrictions on access to government data, or involve data sharing." Id. (emphasis added).
Relevant here, Minn. Stat. § 13.607 (2018), part of the Data Practices Act, expressly limits the Act’s general regime when...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Energy Policy Advocates v. Ellison, A20-1344
...1441. See infra , at C/D-18–20.9 Another alternative construction is the language we considered in Cilek v. Office of the Minnesota Secretary of State , 941 N.W.2d 411 (Minn. 2020). The provision at issue was part of Minnesota's election law, Minn. Stat. § 200.01 (2018). The court noted tha......
-
Energy Policy Advocates v. Ellison
...the Act may limit access to data even if the data were not classified as private, confidential, nonpublic or protected nonpublic. 941 N.W.2d at 415-16. The concluded that Minn. Stat. § 201.091 limited access to registered voter lists and, accordingly, those lists were not public even though......
-
State v. Beganovic
...for the proposition that we may read multiple statutory sections together to determine its plain meaning. Beganovic, 974 N.W.2d at 283-84. In Cilek, we examined whether a Minnesota voter be given access to certain information contained in statewide registered voter lists. 941 N.W.2d at 414-......
-
G&I IX OIC LLC v. Cnty. of Hennepin
...records for litigation purposes is governed under section 278.05."4 Minn. Stat. § 13.4965, subd. 4 ; cf. Cilek v. Off. of Minn. Sec'y of State , 941 N.W.2d 411, 415–16 (Minn. 2020) (reading together an analogous referral statute in the Data Practices Act to conclude that the Act created an ......