Chris Christie's Aides' Emails Would Have Remained Secret But For "The Record"

Gov. Christie and Chief of Staff, Bridget Anne Kelly

***

WASHINGTON — Personal emails at the center of the brewing scandal involving New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie might have remained secret, had the public and media relied solely on the state’s open-records law.

Emails disclosed last week show a top Christie aide asking the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to shut down three lanes on the busy George Washington Bridge, resulting in days of major backups last September. Those emails were leaked to reporters last week — a newspaper requested them nearly a month ago, only to be told they didn’t exist.

The use of private emails adds Christie to a growing list of politicians who use private email accounts and other digital services to conduct official business. In turn, state and federal officials, regardless of political party, have sidestepped public-records laws meant to keep government activities transparent.

The Record of Bergen, N.J., said it filed an open-records request last month asking for emails related to the Port Authority’s decision to close the bridge lanes. The request specifically sought emails between David Wildstein, a Christie-appointed Port Authority official, and employees in the governor’s office.

The newspaper received a response from Christie’s office 10 days later, stating that the office “ reviewed its records” but did not find any responsive emails. Weeks later, however, emails similar to what The Record asked for were made public after being obtained under subpoena by state Assembly Democrats.

It’s unclear why the governor’s office didn’t turn over emails from the Yahoo Mail account of Christie’s former deputy chief of staff, Bridget Anne Kelly. She used the service to send messages to Wildstein, who ordered the bridge lanes closed.

Public-records laws, which can vary widely from state to state, govern how officials’ documents and correspondence should be stored and released. But those laws largely have been slow to catch up to the digital age.

And judges have been left to interpret how technology fits into the laws.