Supreme Court to decide if R-71 names are public
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court is getting involved for the second time this week in a case in which gay rights opponents fear publicity about them would lead to harassment.
The high court will decide whether the names of people in Washington state who wanted to vote on whether to give gay couples expanded rights should be made public.
Protect Marriage Washington unsuccessfully opposed expanded domestic partnership rights. It say its supporters will be harassed if state officials release the names of people who signed to get Referendum 71 on the ballot.
Justices earlier intervened in another case where gay rights opponents complained about potential harassment. The court's conservative majority decided to block the televising of a trial on California's ban of same-sex marriage.
Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed said he was not surprised the court agreed to hear the R-71 case.
"I think they'd probably be intrigued with this type of a case," Reed said. "It is weighing on one had the right of the public to know... and on the other is the privacy of individuals."
He said he expects the court to agree with the state that the initiative signatures are a matter of public record.
"We really welcome the opportunity to go to the U.S. Supreme Court to defend Washington citizen's desire for transparency, openness and accountability in government," he said. "We are a state with a history of believing in the public's right to know."
James Bopp, an attorney for Protect Marriage Washington, said a decision in favor of keeping the names private would offer protection to everyone involved in the gay marriage debate, regardless of which side they're on.
He said Protect Marriage Washington is eager for the case to be heard.
"We are certainly encouraged by the fact that the Supreme Court initially stayed the making public these names," he said. "We believe our case has objective legal merit, and we hope the court agrees with us."
The high court will decide whether the names of people in Washington state who wanted to vote on whether to give gay couples expanded rights should be made public.
Protect Marriage Washington unsuccessfully opposed expanded domestic partnership rights. It say its supporters will be harassed if state officials release the names of people who signed to get Referendum 71 on the ballot.
Justices earlier intervened in another case where gay rights opponents complained about potential harassment. The court's conservative majority decided to block the televising of a trial on California's ban of same-sex marriage.
Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed said he was not surprised the court agreed to hear the R-71 case.
"I think they'd probably be intrigued with this type of a case," Reed said. "It is weighing on one had the right of the public to know... and on the other is the privacy of individuals."
He said he expects the court to agree with the state that the initiative signatures are a matter of public record.
"We really welcome the opportunity to go to the U.S. Supreme Court to defend Washington citizen's desire for transparency, openness and accountability in government," he said. "We are a state with a history of believing in the public's right to know."
James Bopp, an attorney for Protect Marriage Washington, said a decision in favor of keeping the names private would offer protection to everyone involved in the gay marriage debate, regardless of which side they're on.
He said Protect Marriage Washington is eager for the case to be heard.
"We are certainly encouraged by the fact that the Supreme Court initially stayed the making public these names," he said. "We believe our case has objective legal merit, and we hope the court agrees with us."