Summary

Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, was compelled by a court order to release the names of about 218,000 voters to lawyers representing right-wing activists.

The appeals court upheld a lower court’s decision, which requires disclosing voter information due to a coding error that incorrectly classified some voters’ ballot access.

Fontes, who expressed serious concerns over potential harassment and violence against these voters, unsuccessfully tried to block the request.

The court ruled that Fontes had not provided sufficient proof that releasing the list posed a danger to voters.

    • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s nowhere near as far. The odds of someone on the right intimidating voters because of a foreign looking last name has been proven to be near 1 whereas there are no reported instances of the left doing the same.

      There are no “both sides” on this issue. Only one side who wants to hurt the other.

      • krashmo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        You know the saying; be the change you want to see in the world. Get out there and start punching some Nazis for sport.

  • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    100
    ·
    2 months ago

    The court ruled that Fontes had not provided sufficient proof that releasing the list posed a danger to voters.

    Will he have enough proof after people on the list find threats in their mailboxes, their houses catching on fire, their car’s tires slashed?

  • Roopappy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    2 months ago

    The court ruled that Fontes had not provided sufficient proof that releasing the list posed a danger to voters.

    (24 hours later)

    Holy crap! They’re going after the voters! Nobody could have seen this coming!

    • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      2 months ago

      A reasonable court would have said “that’s a totally legitimate concern” and maybe suggested options for reviewing election integrity concerns without exposing PII to third parties.

      This court would probably have waved off public statements by neo-nazis that they would hunt these people for sport as “insufficient cause for concern.”

  • Lasherz12@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    From the wording it sounds like it wasn’t made public, just presented to the lawyers. It’s similar to how jehovah witnesses tried to pierce anononimity for the antijw reddit posters to identify defendants in a copyright lawsuit and the judge said something akin to “It’s understandable that you don’t want your name publicly associated with this post, but the court system imparts trust on lawyers to act as good stewards of this information and so plaintiffs council may have access to your identity.” If this information is leaked they should be disbarred on the spot for mishandling the data.

  • Linktank
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 months ago

    Did he try gesturing broadly at the general situation as proof?