As you may recall, Protect Marriage Washington is challenging state election rules that require the release of names and addresses of people who sign petitions, including for Referendum 71. The referendum, which qualified for the ballot in summer, put the state's third domestic-partnership law for gay couples and straight seniors up for a public vote. (Voters upheld the law.) State rules mandate that the names of all petition signers be released upon request, argued Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna, and a group called WhoSigned.org had requested the names and addresses of R-71 signers to post online. Those petition signers were engaging in the lawmaking process and should be subject to the same scrutiny as any lawmaking process. As an example of the need for transparency, there were many questions about whether signature gatherers were telling the truth and if the election workers wrongly validated some signatures. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the signatures should remain public. But Protect Marriage Washington, a group of Christian extremists who put the measure on the ballot, appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, keeping the release of the names in limbo. The bigots argued that they would in be danger of gay people kicking their asses if their names and addresses were publicized.
Today the Secretary of State's office reports that the Supreme Court will meet on January 15 to review several cases, voting whether to hear or reject each case, including the case on R-71:
If the court declines to take the case, the 9th Circuit Court’s decision will stand. If the court accepts the case, it will likely be argued in April, with a decision to be handed down by the end of June. There also is a state court injunction entered by Thurston County Superior Court Judge Richard Hicks that also prevents the release of the R-71 petitions. The case in front of Judge Hicks is stayed pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s action. ...Early in December, Deputy Solicitor General William Collins of the State Attorney General’s Office urged the Supreme Court to not take the case, and to allow the 9th Circuit decision to stand. Collins said several states allow release, and that the First Amendment challenge is only now arising, indicating that there is no important national question involved.
I hope that the Supreme Court takes the case. They should reject once and forever the ludicrous argument that bigots have special rights to hide while they restrict the rights of minorities. Moreover, laws shouldn't be made in a vacuum, especially by religious fanatics.
