Summary of Kratovil v. City of New Brunswick:
The plaintiff, a journalist for New Brunswick Today, focused on local news about the City. The defendant, Caputo, was a retired police officer and Director of the City’s Police Department. The plaintiff discovered that Caputo may have been living in Cape May and sought confirmation through public records. When Caputo’s address was revealed at a City Council meeting, he invoked Daniel’s Law to prevent further publication of his address. The court ruled in favor of the defendants, upholding the constitutionality of Daniel’s Law in preventing the disclosure of certain government officials’ addresses for security reasons.
Note: The court did not consider the recent retirement of the police chief in its decision.
For similar cases with differing outcomes, refer to Publius v. Boyer-VineĀ (C.D. Cal. 2017), Brayshaw v. City of Tallahassee (N.D. Fla. 2010), Sheehan v. Gregoire (W.D. Wash. 2003), and Ostergren v. Cuccinelli (4th Cir. 2010). It’s important to note that residential picketing is not prohibited in most states, including New Jersey.
If individuals want to picket a certain location but are legally prohibited from publicizing the address, how can they proceed? Would it be justifiable for the organizer to disclose the address, but not for someone simply trying to show that a police chief lives outside of town?
Susan K. O’Connor presented the arguments for the defendants in this case.
Source link
