Missouri’s great Sunshine Law isn’t a political tool for Eric Schmitt’s Senate bid

Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt should explain to the public — quickly — why he wants three years of email correspondence involving University of Missouri professors and PolitiFact, a nationally-known web-based publication.

Schmitt’s office filed requests for the communications in June. He made the requests using Missouri’s Sunshine Law, which broadly requires prompt disclosure of documents created by public officials.

We like the Sunshine Law a lot. You should too. It enables Missourians, including journalists, to know what office-holders and public employees are really up to. That includes officials at Missouri’s public universities, including its professors.

But the law isn’t a plaything for Schmitt or his staff to use for their amusement, or to advance a political campaign. (Schmitt is a U.S. Senate candidate.) It’s meant to protect the public’s interest in government. Eric Schmitt, whose salary is paid by taxpayers, is supposed to work for the public, not himself. The attorney general’s office enforces the state’s Sunshine Law.

We’ve seen no clear explanation of how the public’s interest is served by a fishing expedition into university correspondence with PolitiFact. Schmitt should provide one.

In a statement, a spokesman said Schmitt is “simply trying to get to the bottom of the fact checking process.” Try not to smile at the idea that Eric Schmitt is truly interested in facts, or the fact-gathering “process.” He’s made a career of, and a campaign of, filing frivolous lawsuits based on political assertion, not facts.

Remember: Schmitt joined the 2021 lawsuit seeking to throw out nearly 7 million presidential votes in Pennsylvania. He is part of the Big Lie campaign.

He sued China for COVID-19, a case dismissed by a judge named Limbaugh. He’s sued school districts over mask mandates. He’s fought to keep innocent people behind bars. He resisted efforts to fully fund the state’s public defenders.

These lawsuits, and others Schmitt has filed for political purposes, are not harmless. They use the public’s money and the court’s time and energy. They politicize the judicial system.

Similar damage is possible here. Schmitt’s request could have a bone-chilling effect on academic and press freedom, which are also public goods that should be protected.

Professors at public universities should not have to fear routine investigation from the attorney general, absent evidence of actual misbehavior. And Missourians should be concerned that Schmitt seeks to inject himself into the process of teaching independent journalism.

To be clear: Eric Schmitt is entitled to use the Sunshine Law, just like every other Missourian. But every Missouri taxpayer should demand an explanation of how their interests are served by the state pursuing professors, and a well-respected media organization.

Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should.

“We’d be happy to sit down with the attorney general at any time to discuss our work, or his ideas for continued accountability journalism,” said Aaron Sharockman, PolitiFact’s executive director. That seems like a good step. Schmitt should explain why he hasn’t taken it, if his goal is truly to better understand the fact-checking process as he claims.

In statements, the University of Missouri says it will comply with any Sunshine requests that are legal. That’s the proper response.

Eric Schmitt has yet to explain why public resources are needed to pursue this request. His silence is regrettable.