This story comes out of Louisiana. NOLA.com/Times-Picayune has been ordered to reveal the identities of commenters to its site. The case grows out of the prosecution of an individual accused of self dealing with funding following Hurricane Katrina, but the issue with commenters arose out of a case involving five police officers and their conduct in the aftermath of the hurricane.
What happened was that there was evidence that commenters, on that separate case and writing under pseudonyms, were actually persons working in the U. S. Attorneys office. The rationale for revealing actual identities may seem obvious, but the precedent is troubling. The website has a practice of maintaining the confidentiality of its commenters. And, of course, there are always those like me who will warn you about the slippery slope. If it can happen in this case, already one case removed, what will be the next justification…and the next.
Something interesting to chew on, I thought. Your views? Or are you reluctant to comment knowing that this site too could be compelled to reveal your identity? The question is legit. You see, if other commenters, say you for example, have even the slightest hesitation to continue commenting that’s called a chilling of speech, and that raises all manner of additional issues around the First Amendment…and maybe the Fourth.
A little more here .
Contributor, aka tidbits. Retired attorney in complex litigation, death penalty defense and constitutional law. Former Nat’l Board Chair: Alzheimer’s Association. Served on multiple political campaigns, including two for U.S. Senator Mark O. Hatfield (R-OR). Contributing author to three legal books and multiple legal publications.