Disclosure ruling goes against harrassed donors
A Federal judge in Sacramento yesterday ruled against the Yes on 8 Committee’s motion to protect some of its later donors from public disclosure (due on February 2) because of a persistent, organized campaign of personal and business harassment of prior disclosed donors by supporters of gay marriage, who gleaned the names and addresses of those donors from government records.
The claims made by Yes on 8 are similar to constitutional arguments that won the day in prior cases involving communists and socialists, who claimed they would be harassed and their privacy rights violated if their names and addresses were publicly disclosed by the government in connection with the campaigns of their partys. The Federal Judge in the Yes on 8 case didn’t agree, even thoughthe claims of the Yes on 8 committee were stronger than the other established cases, and supported by real evidence of an organized boycott of businesses and personal harassment of donors who gave as little as $100.
Liberal election lawyers were happy with the result, but concerned that Yes on 8 might have some success by filing an emergency appeal to the Ninth… Read More