The Michigan Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from a parent seeking to view her school district’s curriculum materials, in a decision that some say will have “enormous” implications in other cases where citizens try to access local government records.

The Rochester, Michigan parent, Carol Beth Litkouhi, had been engaged in a years-long battle seeking to view curriculum materials for a high school class called “A History of Ethnic and Gender Studies” after stumbling upon a teacher’s social media post that “raised questions” for Ms. Litkouhi about what her children might be exposed to in future classes. Yet the state’s high court left in place an appellate decision that found that public school teachers don’t qualify as “public bodies” under the Freedom of Information Act, thus making their records not subject to disclosure. 

“At the heart of my lawsuit was a simple but critical principle: Nothing taught in our schools should be under the cover of secrecy,” Ms. Litkouhi said in a statement. “If there is any reason why secrecy is desired or needed, that alone is a red flag. The Rochester School Board felt it best to keep classroom materials secret from parents. They took money away from classrooms to fight this fight. Sadly, they have now succeeded in setting a new, disturbing legal precedent.”

Ms. Litkouhi first filed a FOIA request in 2021, which Rochester Community Schools partially denied, saying the district wasn’t in possession of documents including teacher lesson plans and student reading assignments — although it did provide her with the “teacher training materials and references for the course,” a court filing notes. 

When Ms. Litkouhi appealed the decision to the school district, the district said it had provided all relevant documents — a claim that Ms. Litkouhi disputed, given that the class  had “been allowed to run uninterrupted for the last 6 months.” She sued the school district in 2022, arguing that the district was adopting too narrow of a reading of its FOIA responsibilities by only producing records in possession of the district administration and not records held by member schools or individual teachers. 

Rochester’s school district argued that documents created and held onto by specific teachers are not “public records” subject to FOIA disclosure. 

Earlier this year, Michigan’s Appeals Court ruled in favor of the school district, noting that “Public school teachers are not included in the definition of ‘public body’ and therefore records created and retained by individual teachers are not public records subject to disclosure for purposes of FOIA.” The court also said any attempt to get the court to “read public school teachers or public employees generally into the definition of public body” is “improper” and that her complaint is better addressed to the legislature. 

The state’s Supreme Court, in a 5-2 decision, left that decision in place, saying in a brief order that it was “not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.”

“This isn’t just about a single class in one school district,” a director at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, Steve Delie, said — the group represented Ms. Litkouhi in court. “The implications of this decision are enormous. It means that records held by local government employees across the state — whether they be teachers, police officers or township workers — are likely exempt from public disclosure, making it much harder for citizens to hold their local governments accountable.”

Rochester’s school district wasn’t immediately reachable for comment.