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law enforcement, prosecutors, and other officials to request that private entities not disclose their home addresses or unpublished home phone numbers.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
Pinakabagong Balita
Disclaimer: Ang mga kabilang sa XM Group ay nagbibigay lang ng serbisyo sa pagpapatupad at pag-access sa aming Online Trading Facility, kung saan pinapahintulutan nito ang pagtingin at/o paggamit sa nilalaman na makikita sa website o sa pamamagitan nito, at walang layuning palitan o palawigin ito, at hindi din ito papalitan o papalawigin. Ang naturang pag-access at paggamit ay palaging alinsunod sa: (i) Mga Tuntunin at Kundisyon; (ii) Mga Babala sa Risk; at (iii) Kabuuang Disclaimer. Kaya naman ang naturang nilalaman ay ituturing na pangkalahatang impormasyon lamang. Mangyaring isaalang-alang na ang mga nilalaman ng aming Online Trading Facility ay hindi paglikom, o alok, para magsagawa ng anumang transaksyon sa mga pinansyal na market. Ang pag-trade sa alinmang pinansyal na market ay nagtataglay ng mataas na lebel ng risk sa iyong kapital.
Lahat ng materyales na nakalathala sa aming Online Trading Facility ay nakalaan para sa layuning edukasyonal/pang-impormasyon lamang at hindi naglalaman – at hindi dapat ituring bilang naglalaman – ng payo at rekomendasyon na pangpinansyal, tungkol sa buwis sa pag-i-invest, o pang-trade, o tala ng aming presyo sa pag-trade, o alok para sa, o paglikom ng, transaksyon sa alinmang pinansyal na instrument o hindi ginustong pinansyal na promosyon.
Sa anumang nilalaman na galing sa ikatlong partido, pati na ang mga nilalaman na inihanda ng XM, ang mga naturang opinyon, balita, pananaliksik, pag-analisa, presyo, ibang impormasyon o link sa ibang mga site na makikita sa website na ito ay ibibigay tulad ng nandoon, bilang pangkalahatang komentaryo sa market at hindi ito nagtataglay ng payo sa pag-i-invest. Kung ang alinmang nilalaman nito ay itinuring bilang pananaliksik sa pag-i-invest, kailangan mong isaalang-alang at tanggapin na hindi ito inilaan at inihanda alinsunod sa mga legal na pangangailangan na idinisenyo para maisulong ang pagsasarili ng pananaliksik sa pag-i-invest, at dahil dito ituturing ito na komunikasyon sa marketing sa ilalim ng mga kaugnay na batas at regulasyon. Mangyaring siguruhin na nabasa at naintindihan mo ang aming Notipikasyon sa Hindi Independyenteng Pananaliksik sa Pag-i-invest at Babala sa Risk na may kinalaman sa impormasyong nakalagay sa itaas, na maa-access dito.
