Courts for many reason “seal” arrest records. Yet, if you interview someone for a job, how do you know if that person had been a criminal, a bank robber or stealer of cars—if government refuses to allow you to know. If someone is up for a big government job—why should their arrest records be sealed—the governed have a right to know.
“In its complaint, the First Amendment Coalition claims Bonta and Chiu recently used California Penal Code § 851.92(c), known as the anti-dissemination statute, to threaten and prevent a journalist from publishing information about a former tech CEO’s 2021 arrest on suspicion of domestic violence.
That section of the California Penal Code prohibits almost any person — whether journalist, advocate, activist, lawyer, victim, or witness — from disseminating any information “relating to” a sealed arrest record, with a punishment of up to $2,500 for each mention of the sealed arrest. The penalty is enforced by the city attorney or state attorney general.”
It is time for government to be transparent. What do you think?
Free speech advocates blast California ban on news reporting of sealed arrest records
The First Amendment Coalition claims that the penal code statute is a blatant violation of the First Amendment.
Michael Gennaro, Courthousenews, 11/22/24 https://www.courthousenews.com/free-speech-advocates-blast-california-ban-on-news-reporting-of-sealed-arrest-records/
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — The First Amendment Coalition sued California Attorney General Rob Bonta and San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu in San Francisco federal court Friday, claiming they chill free speech by using a section of the California penal code to punish journalists who publish information related to sealed arrest records.
In its complaint, the First Amendment Coalition claims Bonta and Chiu recently used California Penal Code § 851.92(c), known as the anti-dissemination statute, to threaten and prevent a journalist from publishing information about a former tech CEO’s 2021 arrest on suspicion of domestic violence.
That section of the California Penal Code prohibits almost any person — whether journalist, advocate, activist, lawyer, victim, or witness — from disseminating any information “relating to” a sealed arrest record, with a punishment of up to $2,500 for each mention of the sealed arrest. The penalty is enforced by the city attorney or state attorney general.
“By itself, the anti-dissemination statute threatens a host of protected speech on important public issues,” the First Amendment Coalition says in its complaint.
The anti-dissemination statute applies even if the reporter learns of the arrest through lawful means, such as reading a newspaper article, a public record or witnessing the arrest. The First Amendment Coalition claims that is a blatant violation of the First Amendment.
“The First Amendment does not permit the government to punish a speaker for conveying information of public concern the speaker already lawfully possesses,” the group says in its complaint.
The incident involving former tech CEO Maury Blackman was revealed by journalist Jack Poulson in an article on Substack in 2023. Blackman was the president and CEO of Premise Data, which has ties to the government and provides data to the U.S. military.
When Blackman found out Poulson had published the arrest report, he enlisted the help of Chiu’s office to send letters to journalists reporting on the arrest to censor their articles. This year, Blackman sued Poulson using a John Doe pseudonym in San Francisco State Court demanding $25 million in damages
Now, the First Amendment Coalition says it fears it will be targeted by Bonta and Chiu because it has reported on the arrest and fears retaliation if it publishes other information on the arrest.
“Presently, the San Francisco city attorney is using the anti-dissemination statute to chill journalists and publishers from reporting on the arrest of the now-former CEO of a controversial tech company,” the group says in its complaint. “After the San Francisco Police Department shared that information in response to a public record request, the CEO enlisted the city attorney in a joint effort to try to put the horse back in the barn by having the city attorney’s office repeatedly send letters, ‘pursuant to’ the anti-dissemination statute, demanding censorship of articles about the arrest.”
The First Amendment Coalition wants Bonta and Chiu barred from using the anti-dissemination statute to further chill free speech by journalists. The group claims the anti-dissemination statute makes its advocacy work illegal.
JT Morris of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression represents the nonprofit. Morris did not respond to requests for comment by press time.
Chiu’s and Bonta’s offices did not reply to requests for comment by press time.
