Even as they rebelled against a $1.8 billion fund for President Trump’s allies, Republicans looked the other way as his administration granted him potentially lucrative tax protections.
Even as they rebelled against a $1.8 billion fund for President Trump’s allies, Republicans looked the other way as his administration granted him potentially lucrative tax protections.
Judges tend to be very protective of info like home address, and for good reason. Data brokers and background checks tend to expose it.
Doxxing and not getting a traffic ticket or DUI are two different things.
But. This should apply to ANY person. I’m no judge and I too don’t want to my home address found easily.
I get why the judge gets the protection. But I don’t get why not everybody gets that protection too.
Data brokers as a whole should be forbidden.
This.
Also, the story - and maybe it was just one of those urban legends - was that the clampdown on this data, at least in the state of Colorado, came after a judge got a DUI and that became public knowledge or something.
I think to an extent. But at the same time, I remember the white pages and when I was growing up the school gave every parent a directory with all the phone numbers for everyone in the school so they could call their classmates if they missed an assignment.
In a local setting, it does make a community stronger. But there is a problem with the Internet and the global reach.
Judges face a lot more active threats from people who have gotten out of prison. For most of us, being easily found is an advantage. For judges it’s life-threatening
Well, with online threats and things like “swatting”, I think we could all use similar protections.
The odds for most people if being swatted are really really low. The odds of somebody you know wanting to mysteriously drop off cupcakes are many orders of magnitude higher.