NJ Supreme Court Strikes Down First Amendment Challenge to Daniel’s Law
The New Jersey Supreme Court upheld Daniel’s Law in a decision Tuesday, rejecting a journalist’s First Amendment challenge to the statute that aims to protect certain public officials' personal information.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Privacy Daily provides accurate coverage of newsworthy developments in data protection legislation, regulation, litigation, and enforcement for privacy professionals responsible for ensuring effective organizational data privacy compliance.
In Charles Kratovil v. City of New Brunswick, Kratovil, a local newspaper editor and reporter, said that Daniel’s Law violated freedom of speech and freedom of the press because it prevented him from publishing the address of New Brunswick Police Director Anthony Caputo.
Justice Anne Patterson, who delivered the opinion of the court, disagreed, ruling Daniel's Law "achieve[d] the state interest of the highest order: protection of certain public officials from harm and the threat of harm so that they can perform their public duties without fear of reprisal.”
The decision was unanimous for the five judges who ruled. Three other jurists, Chief Justice Stuart Rabner and Justices John Jay Hoffman and Douglas Fasciale, didn't participate.
Kratovil sued after Caputo asked that he not publish his home address, as he is a covered person under Daniel’s Law. The journalist said the location of Caputo’s home, which, he argued, was a matter of public concern, related to the police director's ability to perform his professional duties.
Previously, a trial court rejected Kratovil’s challenge and dismissed his complaint. A New Jersey appeals court affirmed that judgment. While the Supreme Court ruled to affirm the appellate decision, the justices modified it slightly because they agreed with Kratovil that where Caputo lives is of concern to the public. Caputo resides in Cape May, more than a two-hour drive from New Brunswick, according to Google.
This decision comes as the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has taken up a challenge to Daniel’s Law (see 2504040031). The New Jersey statute has been controversial because of many lawsuits filed under it in recent years, which some privacy lawyers say are "frivolous" and an "abuse" of the law (see 2504040031 and 2503120025). Vermont considered a bill based on Daniel's Law this year but ultimately punted on the measure until next year (see 2505010013).
The Supreme Court's ruling comes in the wake of the June 14 shooting deaths of former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman (D) and her husband and the attempted killing of John Hoffman (D), a Minnesota senator, and his wife. Suspected assassin Vance Boelter, who posed as a police officer, is alleged to have obtained addresses for Hortman and Hoffman and many other public officials via online searches through data brokers. The 2020 killing of a New Jersey judge's son by a man posing as a delivery driver prompted the creation of Daniel's Law, which allows certain public officials to have online sites delete their addresses.