New Jersey defends privacy law shielding judges, prosecutors
Adds comment from Thomson Reuters in paragraphs 9-10
By Nate Raymond
Aug 6 (Reuters) -New Jersey's attorney general is urging a federal judge to reject a bid by scores of businesses to have a new law barring the disclosure of home addresses and other personal information belonging to judges and prosecutors declared unconstitutional.
New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin's office in a Monday brief argued the disclosure restrictions served to protect public safety and did not run afoul of the companies' free speech rights under the U.S. Constitution's 1st Amendment.
"The law achieves that important public-safety goal, and reflects the venerable tradition of safety and privacy in one's home, in well-tailored ways," the state's lawyers told U.S. District Judge Harvey Bartle in Camden.
The measure, known as Daniel's Law, was signed into law in 2020 by Democratic Governor Phil Murphy in response to the fatal shooting of the 20-year-old son of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas at her New Jersey home by a disgruntled lawyer.
The law, which has since been expanded, allows current and former judges, law enforcement, prosecutors, and other officials to request that private entities not disclose their home addresses or unpublished home phone numbers.
Companies that do not comply with an official's request to not disclose their information can be sued for damages.
A similar federal law named after Salas' son, the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act, was enacted by Congress in late 2022 and protects judges by shielding their personal information online.
The constitutional challenge to New Jersey's law came in response to more than 100 lawsuits against various businesses that were filed by a company called Atlas Data Privacy, which was assigned claims by over 19,000 people eligible for protection under Daniel's Law.
The companies it has sued include real estate businesses; marketing companies; data brokers and credit reporting agencies. Among the defendants are CoStar Group, Oracle Corp, Zillow and Thomson Reuters, Reuters' parent company.
In a statement, Thomson Reuters said it "has long been committed to honoring privacy and keeping personal data safe." It said Daniel's Law "attempts to serve a laudable goal" but in its current form is overbroad and violates the 1st Amendment.
The companies in seeking to dismiss the lawsuits in June argued the law was too sweeping and "restricts substantially more speech than necessary to achieve its goal of enhancing the safety of public officials."
But Platkin's office, which intervened to defend Daniel's Law, in Monday's brief said the companies could not meet the high bar of establishing the law was facially invalid under the 1st Amendmentand lacked a plainly legitimate sweep.
It said the legislature enacted the law for a valid purpose to combat an "appalling trend" of threats to judges by "empowering individuals to protect their own privacy at home, a tradition that has always coexisted with the First Amendment."
Lawyers for Atlas in a separate brief argued the data regulated by Daniel’s Law did not constitute "speech" protected by the 1st Amendmentand that, even if it did, the law was a valid content-neutral restriction that could be upheld.
The case is Atlas Data Privacy Corp v. LightBox Parent LP, et al, U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, No. 22-4105.
For Atlas Data Privacy Corp: Rajiv Parikh of PEM Law, Mark Mao of Boies Schiller Flexner and John Yanchunis of Morgan & Morgan
For LightBox, et al: Kevin McDonough of Latham & Watkins
For New Jersey: Daniel Vannella of the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General
Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston
Dernières actualités
Avertissement : Les entités de XM Group proposent à notre plateforme de trading en ligne un service d'exécution uniquement, autorisant une personne à consulter et/ou à utiliser le contenu disponible sur ou via le site internet, qui n'a pas pour but de modifier ou d'élargir cette situation. De tels accès et utilisation sont toujours soumis aux : (i) Conditions générales ; (ii) Avertissements sur les risques et (iii) Avertissement complet. Un tel contenu n'est par conséquent fourni que pour information générale. En particulier, sachez que les contenus de notre plateforme de trading en ligne ne sont ni une sollicitation ni une offre de participation à toute transaction sur les marchés financiers. Le trading sur les marchés financiers implique un niveau significatif de risques pour votre capital.
Tout le matériel publié dans notre Centre de trading en ligne est destiné à des fins de formation / d'information uniquement et ne contient pas – et ne doit pas être considéré comme contenant – des conseils et recommandations en matière de finance, de fiscalité des investissements ou de trading, ou un enregistrement de nos prix de trading ou une offre, une sollicitation, une transaction à propos de tout instrument financier ou bien des promotions financières non sollicitées à votre égard.
Tout contenu tiers, de même que le contenu préparé par XM, tels que les opinions, actualités, études, analyses, prix, autres informations ou liens vers des sites tiers contenus sur ce site internet sont fournis "tels quels", comme commentaires généraux sur le marché et ne constituent pas des conseils en investissement. Dans la mesure où tout contenu est considéré comme de la recherche en investissement, vous devez noter et accepter que le contenu n'a pas été conçu ni préparé conformément aux exigences légales visant à promouvoir l'indépendance de la recherche en investissement et, en tant que tel, il serait considéré comme une communication marketing selon les lois et réglementations applicables. Veuillez vous assurer que vous avez lu et compris notre Avis sur la recherche en investissement non indépendante et notre avertissement sur les risques concernant les informations susdites, qui peuvent consultés ici.
