Supreme Court: Bigots Can Be Identified

Yesterday the Supreme Court ruled that signatures on a petition can be made public. Anti-gay groups in Washington State had called for a referendum that would overturn a new law there that gave rights to LGBT citizens. The 138,000 people who signed the petitions wanted to take their neighbors' rights away anonymously, saying they were afraid of retaliation for expressing their opinion. The Supreme Court said no, it's okay, people have the right to know who signed those petitions.

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the names of people who signed petitions in an attempt to overturn a new gay rights law in Washington could be made public, a victory for state officials who said the case was a test of open government laws.

Justices ruled 8-1 in a case called Doe V. Reed. Only Justice Clarence Thomas dissented. They heard oral arguments in Washington, D.C., April 28.

The ruling dealt broadly with claims by foes of the new gay rights law that disclosing their names would violate their First Amendment rights. However the justices said the plaintiffs could go back to a lower court to try to get a specific exemption on other grounds - and the chief lawyer for people who signed the Referendum 71 petitions said he would do so. Supreme Court on R-71: Names on petitions can be made public

I grew up in a time when we were taught to stand up for our beliefs. We learned to respect differences of opinion, but when it was our turn we said what we believed and we took the consequences. We called it "freedom," and it carried the cargo of accountability.

These people in Washington wanted to express their opinion and then have the government place a hood over their faces so nobody would know who they were.

Protect Marriage Washington asked justices to shield the names of the 138,000 people who signed R-71 petitions in hopes of overturning the "everything but marriage" same-sex domestic partner law. In November Washington voters upheld the new statute. Gay rights groups have said they'll post the petition signers' names online, and some fear harassment or threats if their names are revealed.

State officials had said there are laws in place to protect people who might be threatened. When people sign petitions or referendums they are acting as legislators, [Washington Attorney General Rob] McKenna said, because they are trying to enact or change laws.

Gary Randall of the Faith and Freedom Network said in an e-mail that plaintiffs will go back and seek an exemption for R-71 signers.

"The names cannot be released to the homosexual activists immediately," Randall wrote. "This matter is not settled yet."

It's not settled? The freakin' Supreme Court has ruled, man, it's settled. C'mon, let's see those names.

They are afraid of retaliation, so what? You speak up, sometimes you have to fight for what you believe. That is what these chickenlivers were trying to subvert with this lawsuit, they want to tear other people's lives down under cover of legal darkness, and even this conservative Supreme Court can see that's not the way we do things around here.