January 15, 2010 4:40 PM
- Text
Supreme Court to Consider Privacy Claims
(CBS/ AP)
The Supreme Court on Friday got involved for the second time this week in a case in which opponents of gay rights fear they will be harassed if their views are made public.
The high court will consider whether Washington state officials can release more than 138,500 names on a petition seeking a vote on overturning the state's domestic partnership rights.
Protect Marriage Washington, which unsuccessfully opposed the law giving gay couples expanded rights, wants to shield from disclosure the signers of the petition for a referendum on that law. The group says it fears harassment by gay rights supporters, some of whom have vowed to post signers' names on the Internet.
"One of the more fascinating issues at the heart of the case is whether advances in technology in the Information Age -a time when information is readily accessible on the Internet to any and all-can actually burden free speech by discouraging people from speaking their minds," said CBS News legal affairs analyst Jan Crawford. "Opponents of domestic partnership laws argue they would be subject to harassment if their names are put on the Internet, which would ultimately discourage people from saying what they really believe on controversial issues."
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has said before the Nov. 3 vote that the names could be made public, but the Supreme Court blocked their release until it decided whether to hear the case.
Justices earlier this week intervened in another case where gay rights opponents complained about potential harassment.
The court's conservative majority decided to block the televising of a trial on California's ban of same-sex marriage. Lawyers representing opponents of gay marriage argued that broadcasts would expose their trial witnesses to retaliation from gay marriage supporters.
In Washington state, Referendum 71 asked voters to approve or reject the so-called "everything but marriage" law, which grants registered domestic partners the same legal rights as married couples.
Voters ratified the law, but the conservative Christian groups that sponsored it want to keep the signed petitions that asked for the referendum out of public view because they fear harassment from gay-rights supporters, some of whom have vowed to post the names of petition signers on the Internet.
"We are pleased that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear this case that seeks to protect the rights of citizens who support a traditional definition of marriage to speak freely and without fear," said James Bopp, Jr., lawyer for Protect Marriage Washington. "No citizen should ever worry that they will be threatened or injured because they have exercised their right to engage in the political process."
U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle in Tacoma blocked the release of the petitions, saying that releasing the names could chill the First Amendment rights of petition signers. The San Francisco-based appeals court reversed that ruling, but the Supreme Court blocked the name's release.
Washington state officials say the petitions are covered by their public record laws. "We welcome an opportunity to go to the highest court in the land to defend Washington citizens' strong desire for transparency, openness and accountability in government, and the public's belief that our state and local public documents must be available for public inspection," Secretary of State Sam Reed said.
But not all state officials feel that way. A GOP state representative, Mike Armstrong of Wenatchee, is sponsoring a bill that would exempt the petitions from public records, while Rep. Reuven Carlyle, a Democrat from Seattle, wants a law making clear that names and addresses on petitions are public record.
The case is Doe v. Reed, 09-559.
The high court will consider whether Washington state officials can release more than 138,500 names on a petition seeking a vote on overturning the state's domestic partnership rights.
Protect Marriage Washington, which unsuccessfully opposed the law giving gay couples expanded rights, wants to shield from disclosure the signers of the petition for a referendum on that law. The group says it fears harassment by gay rights supporters, some of whom have vowed to post signers' names on the Internet.
"One of the more fascinating issues at the heart of the case is whether advances in technology in the Information Age -a time when information is readily accessible on the Internet to any and all-can actually burden free speech by discouraging people from speaking their minds," said CBS News legal affairs analyst Jan Crawford. "Opponents of domestic partnership laws argue they would be subject to harassment if their names are put on the Internet, which would ultimately discourage people from saying what they really believe on controversial issues."
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has said before the Nov. 3 vote that the names could be made public, but the Supreme Court blocked their release until it decided whether to hear the case.
Justices earlier this week intervened in another case where gay rights opponents complained about potential harassment.
The court's conservative majority decided to block the televising of a trial on California's ban of same-sex marriage. Lawyers representing opponents of gay marriage argued that broadcasts would expose their trial witnesses to retaliation from gay marriage supporters.
In Washington state, Referendum 71 asked voters to approve or reject the so-called "everything but marriage" law, which grants registered domestic partners the same legal rights as married couples.
Voters ratified the law, but the conservative Christian groups that sponsored it want to keep the signed petitions that asked for the referendum out of public view because they fear harassment from gay-rights supporters, some of whom have vowed to post the names of petition signers on the Internet.
"We are pleased that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear this case that seeks to protect the rights of citizens who support a traditional definition of marriage to speak freely and without fear," said James Bopp, Jr., lawyer for Protect Marriage Washington. "No citizen should ever worry that they will be threatened or injured because they have exercised their right to engage in the political process."
U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle in Tacoma blocked the release of the petitions, saying that releasing the names could chill the First Amendment rights of petition signers. The San Francisco-based appeals court reversed that ruling, but the Supreme Court blocked the name's release.
Washington state officials say the petitions are covered by their public record laws. "We welcome an opportunity to go to the highest court in the land to defend Washington citizens' strong desire for transparency, openness and accountability in government, and the public's belief that our state and local public documents must be available for public inspection," Secretary of State Sam Reed said.
But not all state officials feel that way. A GOP state representative, Mike Armstrong of Wenatchee, is sponsoring a bill that would exempt the petitions from public records, while Rep. Reuven Carlyle, a Democrat from Seattle, wants a law making clear that names and addresses on petitions are public record.
The case is Doe v. Reed, 09-559.
Popular Now in Politics
- Timothy Dolan: Birth control tweak a "first step"
- CPAC: Will Sarah Palin spring a surprise?
- CPAC: Santorum rips Romney, rouses conservatives
- After uproar, Obama tweaks birth control rule
- Ann Coulter riles up the CPAC crowd
- Santorum: Women could bring "emotions" to combat
- Romney takes on hecklers at Maine town hall
- Archbishop Dolan urges Obama to back down on birth control
- Obama to announce revamp of birth control policy
- CPAC: Anti-Obama beats pro-Romney
- Santorum's big benefactor
- Occupy protestors kicked out of CPAC
- Former Giffords aide to run for her House seat
- CPAC: Huckabee "thanks" Obama for birth control firestorm
- Romney says his conservatism will shine
- Report: Chicago cardinal joins contraceptives fight
- Is Rick Santorum conservatives' last, best hope?
Latest CBS News Headlines
on Facebook
on CBS News
- Cold weather returns to the South; snow possible
- State senator, wife, attacked at western NY casino
- Hundreds gather in Kansas to remember oldest judge
- King memorial group head angry at monument change
on Facebook
- Adele sings a cappella for Anderson Cooper
- Occupy protestors kicked out of CPAC
- CPAC: Will Sarah Palin spring a surprise?
- Beyonce and Jay-Z post first photos of Blue Ivy Carter
on CBS News
