Ruling against Las Vegas police in Ronaldo case a win for transparency, advocates say
Nevadans can rest assured that they will not be sued for requesting public records, thanks to a Thursday ruling from the Nevada Supreme Court.
The court ruled against the Metropolitan Police Department and in favor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada. The decision upholds a District Court ruling that Metro could not sue the Review-Journal and others who sought records related to a 2009 settlement between international soccer star Cristiano Ronaldo and Kathryn Mayorga after the latter accused Ronaldo of raping her in a Las Vegas hotel room.
“We are extremely pleased with the Court’s opinion,” Ben Lipman, chief legal officer for the Review-Journal, said in a statement. “The Review-Journal, together with the ACLU, worked long and hard to ensure that Metro and other governmental entities cannot drag people into court for simply asking for public records. It took a lot of time and effort, but it was worth it. We will continue to stand up for everyone’s right to access public records.”
The decision has two implications in regard to the Nevada Public Records Act: Metro is not a municipality and therefore cannot use what’s known as the judicial confirmation law in court, and Metro could not force another party to go to court on the basis of requesting public records.
The judicial confirmation law does not require another party in court. It was created so municipalities could go to court before beginning a public works project to ensure legality before starting a job. But the court ruled that Metro was not a municipality and therefore could not use the law, as it attempted to in this case.
“The ruling today is a win for everyday people in Nevada that want to see transparency from their government. Nevadans can continue to request public records requests from their government without being worried about getting sued,” said Chris Peterson, the ACLU of Nevada’s legal director.
Metro did not respond to request for comment on Thursday.
Ronaldo case
The fight over public records stems from a controversy over Metro’s investigative file regarding the rape allegations against Ronaldo.
Mayorga and Ronaldo reached a confidential settlement. German news outlet Der Spiegel released the documents years later, according to court documents. Mayorga then gave the documents to Metro in the hope that police would investigate. A federal court later ruled that the documents were privileged and granted a protective order.
Fight over records
Multiple media outlets requested Metro’s investigative file, and Metro agreed to release a redacted version, the court decision said.
But when both Mayorga and Ronaldo tried to prevent the release in federal court, Metro attempted to use a judicial confirmation law to seek the court’s judgment.
That’s when the Review-Journal and the ACLU moved to dismiss Metro’s petition. Metro wanted to amend its petition to ask the court to make a judgment on the Public Records Act.
The Supreme Court’s ruling said Metro was not a municipality and did not have a governing body, and thus could not use the judicial confirmation law. The ruling also said that Metro could not amend its petition once the Review-Journal got involved. That means a person cannot be sued for requesting public records.
“The last thing we need is an everyday citizen putting in a public records request because they’re curious about something the government is doing and the government taking that request and looking at it and being like ‘we really don’t want these records getting out’ and suing the person,” Peterson said.
Contact Katie Futterman at kfutterman@reviewjournal.com. Follow @ktfutts on X and @katiefutterman.bsky.social.
