Dashboard-camera videos of incidents in which police officers use fatal force must be made available to the public in most circumstances, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in a unanimous decision that advocates for open government and transparency are calling a historic victory.

Law enforcement agencies must also release the names of the officers involved in fatal shootings, another key question raised in a lawsuit filed in 2014 by North Jersey Media Group, a division of Gannett that publishes The Record.

“The court says definitively that the balance when there is a shooting will tilt in the favor of disclosure,” said Samuel Samaro, an attorney for North Jersey Media Group. “I think it’s gigantic. It is to me the most Open Records Act-affirming decision from our Supreme Court ever.”

EDITORIAL:Court upheld public’s right to know

COURT HEARING:Lawyers argue for cop IDs in fatal Lyndhurst shooting

THE SHOOTING:Lyndhurst fatal police shooting probed

The Supreme Court justices appeared to be aware of the sensitive nature of their decision, which comes at a time when police shootings of African-Americans, many unarmed, have sparked protests across the country.

In reaching their decision, the justices noted that they weighed the “vital concern” of officer safety; “the need for a prompt, thorough, and reliable investigation”; and “the need for transparency … particularly when law enforcement uses its most awesome authority — deadly force.”

“In the case of a police shooting, non-disclosure of dash-cam videos can undermine confidence in law enforcement and the work that officers routinely perform,” Chief Justice Stuart Rabner wrote in his opinion, which was affirmed by the court’s six other justices. “It can also fuel the perception that information is being concealed — a concern that is enhanced when law enforcement officials occasionally reveal footage that exculpates officers.”

After a high-speed car chase across several Bergen County towns in 2014, Lyndhurst police officers fatally shot Kashad Ashford, a black 23-year-old who was driving a stolen SUV at the time. But authorities declined to release certain information about the shooting.

Reporters for North Jersey Media Group requested several police files and dashboard-camera videos for the Ashford case, and a trial-court judge ordered that they be released.

But in a sweeping decision in 2015, a state appeals court overturned that ruling and found that the police materials in question were not public records but confidential investigative files. As such, they were not covered under New Jersey's transparency law, the Open Public Records Act, the appeals court found.

N.J. COURT:Security camera footage off limits to public

BLOOMFIELD:OPRA case heads to N.J. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court reversed part of that decision on Tuesday, ruling that North Jersey Media Group was entitled under OPRA to unredacted “use of force reports,” which include the names of the officers involved, and to the dash-cam videos under the common-law right of access to public information.

The court also ruled that investigative reports, witness statements and similarly detailed records were not subject to disclosure when they were requested at the outset of the investigation in 2014.

"The Supreme Court has spoken, accepting many of our arguments and rejecting others," a spokesman for the state Attorney General's Office, which represented the defendants, said in an emailed statement. "We nonetheless appreciate that the Court gave careful consideration to this important matter and we respect its decision."

An attorney for the Lyndhurst Police Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Reached by phone, Lyndhurst Police Chief James O’Connor said he had not had a chance to review the decision.

During oral arguments on the case in November, Raymond R. Chance, an assistant state attorney general, argued that disclosing the records would place the state on a “slippery slope” that could lead to many other types of confidential information that might have to be released in the middle of an investigation.

Releasing dashboard-camera videos and officers’ names could place them in danger, he added.

“Officer safety is a legitimate issue, and when you have police shootings, it's a concern,” Chance said.

Michael Bukosky, an attorney for the Lyndhurst police officers, said at the time that videos of police-involved shootings often touch a nerve and could spark threats against the police.

“They are violent, they are visceral, they are raw video footage, and people respond with great concern and great emotional anguish,” Bukosky said.

The Supreme Court ruled, however, that dash-cam videos can be released “in the typical case without placing potential witnesses and informants at risk” and in a way that does not undermine the integrity of an investigation. State statute requires the release of officers’ names, the court said.

Samaro, the attorney for North Jersey Media Group, said that knowing the name of an officer involved in a shooting can help the public learn if the officer has a troubled past, as occurred after a member of the New York Police Department tackled former tennis player James Blake in 2015 in a case of mistaken identity.

"Also, for the families involved, if your child or father or husband is the one who is shot, you certainly want to know who did the shooting," Samaro said. "That's critically important."

A state grand jury in 2015 declined to file criminal charges against any officers involved in the Ashford shooting.

Samaro said North Jersey Media Group would likely receive the dash-cam videos and other documents related to the Ashford case "soon," but he did not know precisely when.

In future cases of fatal police shootings in New Jersey, he added, judges will still have discretion over whether to order dash-cam footage to be released.

“As I read this decision,” he said, “the Supreme Court is telling the lower courts that the circumstances under which it is not released are few and far between.”

On Tuesday afternoon, Judge Glenn A. Grant, acting administrative director of the courts, issued a directive to judges on how to handle requests for such footage.

Email: pugliese@northjersey.com