DANE COUNTY, WI – A circuit court ruling out of Wisconsin from late April is stirring up a debate regarding the balancing of officer safety and public transparency after the circuit ruled that the state’s justice department must release the names and birthdates of current and former law enforcement officers within Wisconsin.
On April 28th, the Dane County Circuit Court ruled in favor of a lawsuit brought forth by The Badger Project and Invisible Institute, the former being an independent news outlet and the latter being a “nonprofit journalism production company,” which has ordered Wisconsin’s Justice Department to disclose the names, birthdates, and relative departments of current and former law enforcement officers.
According to The Badger Project, the lawsuit was first filed back in 2023 after Wisconsin’s Justice Department had “partially denied their request for the policing data,” with the government outfit citing issues pertaining to “safety and privacy concerns, especially for undercover officers.”
Part of the legal arguments brought forth in the lawsuit addressed the concerns around the security of undercover officers, with The Badger Project and Invisible Institute noting “that since undercover officers don’t use their true names, releasing them wouldn’t put them in jeopardy.”
Circuit Court Judge Rhonda Lanford noted in her ruling that the state justice department failed “to overcome the strong presumption in favor of disclosure” of the identities of police officers within Wisconsin, adding, “especially in light of the strong public interest in disclosures related to law enforcement and the weakened privacy expectations inherent in employment as a law enforcement officer.”
Approximately 16,000 law enforcement officers within Wisconsin are expected to be impacted by this decision, which the state’s largest police union, the Wisconsin Professional Police Association (WPPA), issued a statement condemning the ruling from the district court.
“Law enforcement officers already serve under significant public scrutiny. Compiling names, dates of birth, and employment histories into a centralized index creates a resource that could be misused to target officers and their families, facilitate identity theft, or enable harassment,” the WPPA statement reads in part.
The police union further noted that while “individual data points may exist in isolated contexts” as it pertains to the personal information of active and former police officers, “their aggregation fundamentally changes the nature of the information and the risks associated with it.”
An appeal of the district court’s ruling is expected, though Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council President Bill Lueders, who supported the lawsuit, suspects the higher courts within the state will side with the plaintiffs.
“I have a feeling that the higher courts are going to sustain the ruling of the lower courts, because transparency is a pretty important value for the state of Wisconsin. The judicial system tends to side with the idea that the public should have a maximum amount of information about the affairs of government,” Lueders stated.
On April 28th, the Dane County Circuit Court ruled in favor of a lawsuit brought forth by The Badger Project and Invisible Institute, the former being an independent news outlet and the latter being a “nonprofit journalism production company,” which has ordered Wisconsin’s Justice Department to disclose the names, birthdates, and relative departments of current and former law enforcement officers.
According to The Badger Project, the lawsuit was first filed back in 2023 after Wisconsin’s Justice Department had “partially denied their request for the policing data,” with the government outfit citing issues pertaining to “safety and privacy concerns, especially for undercover officers.”
Part of the legal arguments brought forth in the lawsuit addressed the concerns around the security of undercover officers, with The Badger Project and Invisible Institute noting “that since undercover officers don’t use their true names, releasing them wouldn’t put them in jeopardy.”
Circuit Court Judge Rhonda Lanford noted in her ruling that the state justice department failed “to overcome the strong presumption in favor of disclosure” of the identities of police officers within Wisconsin, adding, “especially in light of the strong public interest in disclosures related to law enforcement and the weakened privacy expectations inherent in employment as a law enforcement officer.”
Approximately 16,000 law enforcement officers within Wisconsin are expected to be impacted by this decision, which the state’s largest police union, the Wisconsin Professional Police Association (WPPA), issued a statement condemning the ruling from the district court.
“Law enforcement officers already serve under significant public scrutiny. Compiling names, dates of birth, and employment histories into a centralized index creates a resource that could be misused to target officers and their families, facilitate identity theft, or enable harassment,” the WPPA statement reads in part.
The police union further noted that while “individual data points may exist in isolated contexts” as it pertains to the personal information of active and former police officers, “their aggregation fundamentally changes the nature of the information and the risks associated with it.”
An appeal of the district court’s ruling is expected, though Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council President Bill Lueders, who supported the lawsuit, suspects the higher courts within the state will side with the plaintiffs.
“I have a feeling that the higher courts are going to sustain the ruling of the lower courts, because transparency is a pretty important value for the state of Wisconsin. The judicial system tends to side with the idea that the public should have a maximum amount of information about the affairs of government,” Lueders stated.
For corrections or revisions, click here.
The opinions reflected in this article are not necessarily the opinions of LET
Comments