Posted on 07/27/2010 7:44:40 AM PDT by smokingfrog
A Virginia privacy advocate can post public records containing Social Security numbers of private citizens as well as government officials on her website, a federal appeals court ruled Monday.
The court agreed with B.J. Ostergren's claim that a 2008 state law prohibiting anyone from making Social Security numbers available to the public violated her First Amendment rights.
Ostergren posts the records on her website, TheVirginiaWatchdog.com, to publicize her message that governments are mishandling Social Security numbers and to prod them to correct the problem. Many of the documents are Virginia land records that court clerks have made available on government websites without redacting Social Security numbers.
The General Assembly passed legislation prohibiting Ostergren's practice, saying the state's interest in preventing identity theft trumps her First Amendment rights. A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed.
"The unredacted SSNs on Virginia land records that Ostergren has posted online are integral to her message," Judge Allyson Duncan wrote in the unanimous opinion. "Indeed, they are her message. Displaying them proves Virginia's failure to safeguard private information and powerfully demonstrates why Virginia citizens should be concerned."
The court also agreed that the state cannot punish Ostergren for posting on her website the same public records that the government makes available online.
"Ms. Ostergren's most powerful advocacy weapon has been to demonstrate to the public how bad a job the government is doing to protect our online privacy rights," said Kent Willis, executive director of the ACLU of Virginia, which represented Ostergren. "The government responded, but by trying to silence Ms. Ostergren."
(Excerpt) Read more at hamptonroads.com ...
WHAT??? This cannot possibly be true.
A SS# is personal info and it’s all one needs to steal an identity. As for her getting the numbers from a government website, are you really going to try to tell me that two wrongs make a right?
Security through obscurity is sometimes worse than no security because it leads to an illusion of more security than exists. The IRS should just publish everyone’s SSN and be done with it, and banks should stop using SSNs as a password.
00000111112222233333444445555566666777778888899999
- - -
SOME ASSEMBLY REQUIRED
A basic tenet of public records, if its public in one location its public everywhere..the beef should be with the govt making numbers public in the first place.
I would have no problem whatsoever with this, if they are all politicians or other "public servants".
While I'd want to put some type of old-fashioned country arse whoppin' on Ms.Ostergren if she posted my SS#, all she's doing is re-posting information these state agencies have already made public. With this decision the court has said "The state agency is who your real beef is with so that's who you should be suing" which is essentially what Ms. O's wants you to do. Brilliant in a very wrong-headed sort of way.
No, 2 wrongs don't make a right but at least one of the wrongs here is aimed at correcting the other. Since my number is not posted, I'm willing to cut her some slack. Please check back with me if that status changes.
Based upon what I saw at the site she was showing data on the politician not normal people. It is to force them to make government follow the law and redact the SSN’s.
Unless you are a politician or government employee shee is not posting your info, if you the she wants you to protect everyones info.
Once information is in the public domain, it’s ludicrous to say that it’s personal information and she should be muzzled by the government. Two wrongs don’t make a right, but you act as if this information is so sensitive that it requires more limitations on 1st Amendment rights than classified intelligence gets.
A SS# IS personal info that can be used in identity theft. Address that why don’t you?
Identity theft is one of the fastest growing crimes in America. A dishonest person who has your Social Security number can use it to get other personal information about you. Identity thieves can use your number and your good credit to apply for more credit in your name.
Your number is confidential
The Social Security Administration protects your Social Security number and keeps your records confidential. We do not give your number to anyone, except when authorized by law. You should be careful about sharing your number, even when you are asked for it. You should ask why your number is needed, how it will be used and what will happen if you refuse. The answers to these questions can help you decide if you want to give out your Social Security number.
Nice spam, but none of it pertains to the actual issue at hand. In America, we have something called freedom of speech, and the Government is only allowed to restrict that with “prior restraint” in certain limited circumstances. Social Security numbers are not covered by any of those circumstances. As I said before, you are acting as if Social Security numbers have more protection than the Supreme Court has granted classified intelligence, which is ridiculous.
Either the Federal Register or the Congressional Record used to post the Social Security numbers of people nominated to military officer posts. Hundreds of them.
Again you failed to address that SS#’s are used in identity theft. Until you can address that don’t bother replying with garbage posts.
Everyone knows they are used in identity theft, so what is there to be addressed? Your name is used in identity theft, so should the Government be allowed to muzzle me to prevent me from speaking it? How about your birth date? What is it about social security numbers that makes you seem to think they deserve more protection than classified intelligence?
FR does not allow names, phone numbers and addresses to be posted. Why do you suppose that is?
You’re confusing the issue in both of your arguments there.
First of all the reason I keep bringing up classified intelligence, is because this is a freedom of speech issue. In America, as I stated before, it’s unconstitutional for the Government, Federal or State, to restrain free speech except in a few limited circumstances that have been defined by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Government can not use prior restraint even to protect classified intelligence of national security value. Surely, this type of data being released can cause harm on a much more massive scale than one individual’s identity being stolen. So, the merits of restraint in that case would be much greater, and yet it still outside the bounds of the Government’s constitutional powers.
Also, you state the court ruling “allows someone to post personal info”. That’s not quite the case, since people have ALWAYS been free to publish this information. Any law stating otherwise would be unconstitutional, and the court merely affirmed that fact.
As for the second argument, FR is a PRIVATE website, and as a privately owned forum, it IS free to exercise prior restraint. Different rules apply to the Government than apply to individuals and private organizations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.