Energy Policy Advocates v. Ellison

The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed a district court’s determination that Attorney General Keith Ellison and the Office of the Attorney General properly withheld three emails when responding to a request under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act for data related to outside funding for special assistant attorneys general. The three emails were from other state attorney general offices concerning coordinated legal challenges to address climate change. The appellate court found that the district court did not err by determining that the emails were not public because they were “active civil investigation data.” The appellate court further found that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it refused to order disclosure after considering the harms and benefits of disclosure. The court determined that disclosure of the emails would harm the Attorney General because they contained legal theories about pending litigation and that the benefit of disclosure claimed by the petitioner—that the emails would provide insight into the issue of outside funding of the special assistant attorneys general—was not borne out by the court’s in camera review of the emails.