Slashdot Mirror


SCOTUS Rules Petiton Signatures Are Public Record

Reader SheeEttin reminds us that back in October, the Supreme Court accepted a case testing whether or not petition signers' names could be kept anonymous. (The premise was that the act of signing a petition is covered by free speech, and thus signers are entitled to anonymity, especially to protect them from harassment.) Now the Court has issued its ruling: signatures are part of the public record. "By a strong majority Thursday, the Supreme Court issued a setback for opponents of gay marriage who wanted to keep their identities secret. The justices favored transparency over privacy in a case testing whether signing a petition is a public act. The case began with a bill that the Washington state legislature passed in 2009, expanding the state's domestic partnership law. The new referendum was known as 'everything but marriage' for the enhanced rights it gave same-sex couples. People who opposed the bill gathered 120,000 signatures for a ballot measure asking voters to repeal it. That measure eventually reached Washington voters, who upheld 'everything but marriage.' Those who signed the repeal petition feared that they would be harassed if their names became public, so they went to court challenging Washington's Public Records Act. They argued that signing a petition is speech that is protected from disclosure. But in Thursday's 8-1 ruling, the Supreme Court disagreed. 'Such disclosure does not, as a general matter, violate the first amendment,' Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court."

35 of 780 comments (clear)

  1. While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by Pojut · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...if you feel about something so strongly that you are willing to sign a petition about it, you shouldn't be hiding your name. Stop being a coward, and own up to your opinions/decisions.

    1. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My personal opinion is that a petition should be independently verifiable as to its validity (to make sure there is no petition stuffing going on), and the only way to do that is to make signatory information available to those independent verifiers - and anyone should be able to be an independent verifier.

      Otherwise the petition isn't worth anything.

    2. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by oldhack · · Score: 5, Insightful

      True. I mean, the whole point of adding your name to a petition is, well, adding your name. Petition without names aren't worth the "paper" it's written on, like those stupid email petition spam.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    3. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by PPH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In this case, the big fear is about being outed. The harassment isn't going to come from the gay community. It's what some signers wil have to deal with in their own community when their boy toy spots their name on the petition.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's Un-American! I deserve the right to petition for laws restricting other people's behavior without any risk of being called to account for having done so!

      This country was founded by people who knew that the right to oppress people they didn't like was a right worth crossing the ocean and living in ass-end of the earth for! Who are some activist judges to deny our puritan heritage?

    5. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by Peach+Rings · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Otherwise the petition isn't worth anything.

      ;)

    6. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by causality · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree with you about the man up and stand for your beliefs, however history has shown that standing for something unpopular had a nasty tendency to get you dead or injured.

      In a case like this, anonymity is not a protection for cowards. It's a protection from cowards. There are few things more cowardly and insecure than hating someone and wishing to harm them because they do not believe as you do.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    7. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by Pojut · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ever heard of the secret ballot? There are some very good reasons why we have one. It was created as a response to the coercion and intimidation that went on before one's suffrage could be exercised anonymously. It makes a good analogy for this petition. I'll add that "coward" is a judgment against the character of a person you have never met. Having described that, I feel no need to respond to it or the emotional nature behind it. Instead, I'd like to ask you a factual question.

      I view signing a petition as serving the same purpose as holding up a picket sign.

      If the signatures remain anonymous, the signers have a measure of protection against harassment. Someone gains from that scenario and I can't think of anything it does to harm anyone else. The list of signatures can still be checked to make sure there are no duplicates etc.; the list and whether there are duplicates is just not a matter of public record.

      And if I had four wheels, I'd be a wagon.

      If the signatures are published publically, who gains or who benefits from this? For the opponents of the petition who did not wish to sign it, does it enhance their lives or further their cause in any way to know that John Smith from another city signed this petition? What good or useful purpose does it serve? Does that purpose outweigh the very real possibility of harassment?

      Bottom line: if you feel strongly enough about something to declare your support for it with a fucking signature, you should be man (or woman) enough to own up to it and deal with whatever consequences that may include. If you don't want people to know you feel a certain way about something, or if you fear retribution for your opinion, then you should just shut up and not express it.

      Just my opinion, YMMV, etc.

    8. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know you're being sarcastic, but it's disgusting how these people are afraid of how others might perceive them, when in fact going 'on record' with dangerous opinions is the very foundation of civic society in the United States. The founders signed their own death warrants with the words "[...] we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." How these cowards could learn from their example.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    9. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by radtea · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It makes a good analogy for this petition.

      Except for the part where there is an independent verification body that certifies election results, and where voting elects people the positions of power while petition signing is part of the nominally open and public process of political debate.

      So yeah, other that that, the secret ballot is a great analogy for this petition. But including that, the secret ballot is such a terrible analogy for this petition that it's incredible anyone would bring it up if they have any clue whatsoever as to how secret ballots actually work, and how much effort is made to verify that people in secret ballot situations don't vote twice, and their identity matches who they say they are, and they are actually legally allowed to vote.

      For all we know the names on this petition are "Donald Duck" repeated 100,000 times, or the names of closet gays (also known as Bible Believing Christians) and their minor children.

      Publishing the names serves the good and useful purpose of validating that the signers are who they say they are, and that they are adults living in the State of Washington, as opposed to shills from out of state, minors, or fictional characters. Anyone who wants their voice to be taken seriously in public debate--which is what this petition is part of--would be strongly in favour of having their name known.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    10. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ballots themselves are a matter of public record, it's just the identity of the person who filled it out that is secret.

      A petition is quite a different thing and serves a different purpose. If the names on it cannot be verified, there's nothing to say that the people represented actually signed it.

      The people who signed the petition wish to strongly curtail the legal rights of other people but want to do so anonymously? No good can come of that!

    11. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by caturday · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not in this specific example. The gay community isn't exactly going out of its way to violently oppress those who oppose it, while the other side can't say the same. In fact, I'd be surprised if this were anything more than the traditional belief that "since they should fear retribution from me, I should fear equivalent retribution from them." It's a pretty common belief among modern social conservatives.

    12. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by jimbolauski · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They need to apply the law to all parts of the government, all information regarding our government should be public unless it is classified. No more meetings behind closed doors hiding the deceit from the public. If our representatives knew that their actions were being recorded the ethics of our representatives would go through the roof.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    13. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by Kymermosst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You might just avoid it. But others might replace the word "avoid" with the word "vandalize."

      FYI I'd never vote for gay marriage. Does that make you dislike me?

      Would it suddenly make a difference if I told you that I would like to see the government eliminate all references to marriage of any kind, including traditional (read: heterosexual) marriages? That is, I would like to see the complete and entire elimination of government recognition of "marriage".

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
    14. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What an unsurprising response, an anonymous coward who doesn't have the depth of conviction to stand for his principles. The founders faced the specter of the hangman's noose for treason against the crown of England, but somebody might scratch up your car in your driveway, so you sure as hell can't take a stand... too risky.

      I'm glad this country wasn't full of cowards like you in the 18th century.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    15. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by BZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > The gay community isn't exactly going out of its way to violently oppress those who oppose
      > it, while the other side can't say the same.

      That depends on where you live and how you define "gay community". In California during the Proposition 8 debates and right after its passage there was quite a number of rather ugly incidents.

      http://www.christianexaminer.com/Articles/Articles%20Dec08/Art_Dec08_09.html lists a few; I'm not sure how you can view spray-painting buildings belonging to particular religious groups, punching your neighbors in the face, putting up "bigots live here" signage, etc as something other than "violent oppression". Of course you may be affected by your dislike for the targets of said oppression, but consider how we would view people spray-painting signs saying "Jews live here", say?

      Now clearly only a small fraction of the "gay community" is involved in such acts. On the other hand, only a small fraction of opponents of gay marriage, say, is involved in violent acts. Neither is acceptable, and both are violent oppression in any meaningful sense of the word.

      All of which comes down to the fact that any group that feels like it's in their power (either due to being a majority group or due to special protections from the government like the aristocracy in medieval Europe) will tend to violently oppress people it doesn't like. I wish it weren't so, but history and current events suggest that it is. What we should strive for is minimizing such incidents as much as we can, and NOT through making people shut up and conform.

    16. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      however history has shown that standing for something unpopular had a nasty tendency to get you dead or injured.

      History has also shown that sometimes in order to enact a major change some people have to get dead or injured. During the American Revolution, people didn't try to remain anonymous. John Hancock famously signed his huge ass signature on the Declaration of Independence because he WANTED it to be known that he supported it. These men knew that this document meant that they very well might be swinging at the end of the gallows, but the cause was still worth it.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    17. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by offsides · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you're not strong enough in your convictions to be willing to stand up and face the consequences of supporting them, maybe there's a reason you shouldn't be supporting them. While I don't agree with death threats and the like, if you're going to campaign to take away other peoples' rights, you damn well better do it publicly and in full view of everyone else (which includes knowing who you are).

      If the government tried to take away your rights in secret, you'd be up in arms about that. Just look at /.'s reaction to ACTA. Well, in case you hadn't noticed, petitions are the peoples' way of acting as the government - thus they too should be transparent and not allow for "shadowy masses" to make the rules.

      Also, if someone's truly a wacko who's going to cause problems for you for signing a petition, I've got news for you - they're going to cause trouble whether or not you sign the petition; maybe to someone else instead, but again, that's where the strength of your convictions comes in. It all comes back to that - stand up and announce your position to the world, or SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP!

    18. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wait, I don't follow. Why would a closeted gay sign a petition against gay marriage if no one could verify that he'd done it? I mean, I can see why a closeted gay would sign such a petition if the names were going to go public. If anything, the closeted gay would want the names to go public as evidence that he's not a gay sympathizer.

      This is not about gays not wanting to be outed as gays. This is about bigots not wanting to be outed as bigots.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    19. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by flitty · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Intimidation/threats are against the law. Prosecute that. Whenever someone argues that we should ban/stop something because possibly one day it might be used to commit a crime, you've lost. Same goes for Torrents, Guns, books, video games, etc.

      --
      Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
    20. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by ifdef · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree.

      I think I'm missing something here in this discussion. Signing a petition is a way of saying that *I* support this, it's a way of taking a public stand on the issue. That's why you sign your *name*, instead of ticking a box anonymously. That's also why petitions are, at least in theory, taken seriously -- it's not an anonymous mob who support the petition, it's a bunch of specific people who are willing to put their names on record.

    21. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by Myopic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Point of fact: the country WAS full of cowards like him in the 18th century. The "founding fathers" were a vanishingly tiny group of people, and all their supporters amounted to a small minority of the population. Almost everyone was happy to just let things be.

      So a minor tweak to your point would be that you and I are both glad that there were at least a small number of people willing to stand up for their principles.

    22. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I would be interested in sources that support your claims. The history as I understand it was that the majority of people in the colonies at the time were sympathetic to independence, with less than a fifth being loyalists, and less than that being truly neutral. The reason that more people didn't volunteer for the Continental Army was simply that the pay and provisioning was meager and sporadic, and life in the colonies was for most tenuous and near subsistence. People largely could not afford to abandon their work and their families to go off and harry the British. I would not call that cowardice of any color.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    23. Re:While I agree that anonymity is a good thing... by Myopic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Good question.

      Market theory is premised on perfect knowledge, perfect competition, and rational deciders. As it turns out, all of those premises are wrong, more or less. (They are each somewhat true, but less so than untrue. That's why reality somewhat matches the theory, but less so than not.)

      Imperfect knowledge: If you want to go to a bar, but you only know about smokey bars (maybe because there are only smokey bars), then you will sigh and go to a smokey bar. You have no choice.

      Imperfect competition: Maybe there is a non-smokey bar, but other qualities of a bar make it preferable to you. So you sigh and go to the bar which you otherwise prefer, despite the smoke.

      Irrational decision: Maybe you never really thought about bars being smokey, like you just assume they all have smoke and that's the price of admission. The thought literally never occurred to you to choose a non-smokey bar.

      My guess is that it is the first of those: almost all bars were smokey, so there was hardly any choice to be made. People wanted to go to a drinking establishment, and that meant going to a smokey bar.

      I relate this to food labeling. Americans like their food labels, so why did it take legislation to get them? Why didn't the market provide food labels? Think about it: if you walked into a grocery store and none of the food was labeled, would you walk out and starve to death? No, you would just buy the available food. That's a failure of market theory -- basically because market theory isn't very good at matching reality.

  2. I'm torn on this by davidsinn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Signing a petition is very much like grabbing a sign and picketing. On the flip side it is similar to casting a ballot. I don't know which side to agree with on this one.

    1. Re:I'm torn on this by hsthompson69 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the best way to imagine this is to contemplate the consequences of anonymous petitions. Without the signatures and names being public record, I could pretty much create a petition for anything with any number of signatures you can imagine. With ballot box voting, we've at least done some due diligence on the qualifications of those who get to drop ballots into the box, even if their choices are anonymous, their identities are not.

  3. Expected by Pharmboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it should be expected that if you sign a petition, the information is public. Otherwise, there would be no way to validate the petition. The constitution protects free speech, although not necessarily ANONYMOUS free speech. There are other avenues for anonymous free speech anyway.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  4. Well then, by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Shouldn't the same be true about voting?

    --

    I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

    1. Re:Well then, by PTBarnum · · Score: 4, Informative

      The record of who voted is already public record. If somebody who is not qualified to vote did so, you can't undo their vote, but if you found enough such misvotes you might be able to challenge the entire election. You could also pressure the government to prosecute the voter.

  5. This is why I like the 2nd amendment by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 4, Funny

    It balances things out.

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
  6. There's a name for people like this... by smooth+wombat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Cowards. If you are willing to put your name on a petition to get a measure on the ballot, then you should be willing to stand by your decision. Claiming you don't want your name to be revealed because your friends and neighbors might think differently about you is no excuse to try and hide from your decision.

    It's always funny when those who try to wrap themselves in the veils of freedom and democracy are generally the first ones who don't want others to know what they're up to.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  7. Not really that big of set back by RingDev · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The SCOTUS pointed out that there are exceptions, and the lawyer for the petitioners stated that he believes their case falls in the realm of those exceptions. So it'll go back to a lower court to determine if it within them.

    It strikes me as odd though. I thought the whole point of signing a petition was to publicly announce your support for the petition. I mean, if you don't feel strongly enough to write your name publicly, why not just write Mickey Mouse? And hell, if there is going to be no public scrutiny of who is brave enough to actually back the petition, what's to keep the petitioner from just writing Mickey Mouse 120,000 times.

    There SHOULD be an element of risk to signing a petition. You have to be willing to put your name on the line, literally. That includes showing support for the issue, and dealing with people who may disagree with you.

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    1. Re:Not really that big of set back by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Funny

      I mean, if you don't feel strongly enough to write your name publicly, why not just write Mickey Mouse? And hell, if there is going to be no public scrutiny of who is brave enough to actually back the petition, what's to keep the petitioner from just writing Mickey Mouse 120,000 times?

      Walt Disney's legal department?

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  8. Irony by Aesculapius · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's a magical time when those who would speak out against same sex marriage have feel the need to hide from the public.

    Irony can be fun!

    --
    -A
  9. Dual Edges by WED+Fan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I live in the Seattle area. Among my hobbies and avocations are community theater and gay rights, even though I am straight. I am for same sex marriage (actually, I'm for getting government getting out of the business of licensing marriage and getting religion out of the business of defining it), I've performed them, gratis. However, I have a hard time with this. The more vocal of the gay community were trying to bully state voters who were opposed to a bill that would provide almost all the benefits of marriage to gay couples.

    I routinely sign petitions that, even if I disagree with the premise, I believe deserves a fair airing in public. As a result of this action, I had a minor break with some of my gay friends who were very angry and wanted the names of all the signers.

    --
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.