Sharing an elected Louisiana leader's personal info could soon result in fines, jail time
A legislative proposal originally intended to provide an additional layer of security to judges and prosecutors who deal with violent criminals has been altered to shield a broad range of personal information about state elected officials in Louisiana.
Free speech and good government advocates are concerned officials could use the law, which will take effect unless the governor vetoes the proposal, to silence critics, punish journalists and keep unfavorable information out of the public's hands.
Last week, the legislature gave final approval to House Bill 681 by Rep. Marcus Bryant, D-New Iberia, after Sen. Caleb Kleinpeter, R-Port Allen, added last-minute amendments to include statewide elected officials, members of the Public Service Commission and state lawmakers under an existing state law that shields their personal information from being made public.
The amended version of the bill passed the Senate on a 36-0 vote and the House on an 89-0 vote.
The law prevents the elected officials' home addresses, phone numbers, personal email addresses, Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, federal tax identification numbers, bank account numbers, credit and debit card numbers, license plate numbers from being published in government records or on a public website. Also protected under the law are marital records and birthdates.
An official's church, the school or daycare their child attends and the employment location of their spouse, children or dependents would also be shielded.
'It's incredibly concerning and broad … in a way I cannot describe because I don't yet know how bad it's going to be,' said attorney Scott Sternberg, who works on First Amendment cases, adding that such prosecutions would likely be unconstitutional.
If Gov. Jeff Landry allows the proposal to become law, the newly included elected officials could request their personal information be removed from public records. It could also be used to force someone to remove an online post with personal information about the elected officials.
For example, the law could be wielded against somebody who raises concerns about conflicts of interest pertaining to the employment of an elected official's spouse or child.
If that person does not comply, they can be sued and face misdemeanor charges that carry up to 90 days in prison, a $1,000 fine or both.
The bill could allow the sealing of marital records to prevent the public from learning of allegations of abuse in a divorce proceeding.
'In Louisiana's constitution … we have decided the people are entitled to certain information, because … the people have learned to check up on the government every now and then,' Sternberg said.
'Whenever an exception [to public records law] passes … it limits the public's right to access,' Sternberg added.
Broadening the scope of the bill without public debate troubles good governance advocates.
'Slipping such a significant public records exemption into a bill with little acknowledgment and no debate raises questions about what people are trying to hide and undermines transparency,' said Steven Procopio, president of Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana.
Lawmakers and other individuals involved in Bryant's legislation have not been willing to say how the last-minute amendments got into the bill.
'These bills are not mine. I'm just bringing them,' Bryant said in an interview, referring questions to Zach Daniels, executive director of the Louisiana District Attorneys Association, who declined to comment for this report.
Insurance Commissioner Tim Temple said he asked to have statewide elected officials added to the bill but not state lawmakers or Public Service Commission members. Temple said billboards bearing his home address have been put up around the state, prompting his request.
Senate President Cameron Henry, R-Metairie, said he did not ask for the amendments but supports them.
Public Service Commissioner Davante Lewis, D-Baton Rouge, posted on social media he had 'no clue' how PSC members were added, adding he did not support the legislation.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
5 hours ago
- CNN
‘We learned some lessons': How Chuck Schumer and Democrats are gearing up for the next funding fight with Trump
Democrats will soon face a significant test of their willingness to take on President Donald Trump with a fall funding deadline fast-approaching. And this time, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer doesn't want to become his party's bogeyman. Months after a contentious fight that put him at the center of anti-Trump Democratic outrage, Schumer is already taking steps to avoid, once again, being put in an impossible position between Democratic voters gunning for an ugly shutdown fight with Trump and his party's long-time stance that Democrats should fund the government. This time, they don't want to find themselves with little leverage to get out of a government shutdown with a Republican president. Members say Schumer's strategy is to start laying the groundwork early for what will be a contentious and unpredictable post-August recess with the hope of avoiding the 'Democrats in disarray' narrative that plagued the party in the spring. 'We learned some lessons on what to do and not to do,' one Democratic senator said of the difference between now and the March funding fight. 'Schumer's working on trying to find a path that unifies us.' On Tuesday, Democrats held a lengthy caucus-wide meeting on the path ahead and the Senate minority leader met with his House counterpart, Hakeem Jeffries, later in the day. Members and aides caution there is no formal plan yet for how to tackle Democrats' next showdown with Trump, but it's clear Schumer wants to shield his party from the intense backlash it faced from their voters in March – and avoid his own black eye in the process. Finding consensus, however, won't be easy nor is it a guarantee in a diverse caucus where just nine members joined Schumer in voting with Republicans in March to keep the government open. Since then, Democrats' reasons for challenging Trump have only grown. Republicans passed a massive tax and spending cuts bill that included historic slashes to Medicaid and food programs with just GOP votes. Republicans also voted last week to claw back $9 billion in federal funds for foreign aid and public broadcasting that had already been appropriated by Congress. 'Here's where I am. Unless the Republicans agree to a no rescissions clause, a vote on an appropriations bill is a fake,' Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, told CNN. King was among those in the caucus who voted with Schumer and the GOP to keep the government open, but now King says he has not decided yet if he'd be willing to do that again in the fall. 'Why vote for an appropriation bill if two weeks from now they can submit a rescissions package and undo everything that is in the bill?' King asked. 'Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. I am not going to be fooled twice.' The challenge for Democrats is that they are finding themselves between two realities. On the one hand, Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought and conservatives on Capitol Hill are signaling a willingness for steeper budget cuts that reflect the massive slashes from Trump's Department of Government Efficiency. On the other, Senate Democrats are also working cooperatively with Republicans on the appropriations panel to pass several of the bills to fund military and veterans, agriculture and the legislative branch with broad bipartisan support. And they realize that if the government does shut down –- they may not have the leverage to reopen it. 'There is a real tension between Russ Vought and OMB and the rescissions vote, which are going right at a stable, steady appropriations process and what has been happening on committee so far,' Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, the top Democrat on the Defense appropriations subcommittee, said. Tuesday night, most Senate Democrats joined Republicans on a procedural vote to advance the military and veterans spending bill on the floor, and Schumer signaled that Democrats don't want to stand in the way of advancing bipartisan spending bills that his members have worked hard on. But, there is still a number of factors outside of Schumer's control. For one, House Republicans will manage their appropriations process. Already, conservatives are laying the groundwork for a full revolt if Speaker Mike Johnson tries to move ahead with a stopgap government funding measure known as a continuing resolution rather than passing all 12 individual spending bills. And even if the House could pass the dozen bills with their tight majority, they would many are likely to be nonstarters in the Senate where Republicans need 60 votes to advance their bills. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries signaled this week that Democrats were in no mood to help Republicans pass those bills. 'It's my expectation that if Republicans tried to jam a highly partisan spending bill down the throats of the American people here in the House we'll reject it,' the New York Democrat said when asked by CNN if he would take the same tactic as last year in rejecting GOP spending bills. 'At the end of the day, Republicans control the trifecta,' Sen. Mark Warner, a Democrat, said of the unpredictability of the next few months for the party. In March, Schumer defended his decision to vote with Republicans to keep the government open. He argued that not doing so would give Trump more power, not less. And he downplayed the divisions within his ranks even as some members openly clashed with him over his decision. But in recent weeks, Schumer has signaled he's open to preparing a number of options depending on how the spending talks unfold, and Democratic members say he has been deeply engaged for weeks on how to manage the September fight. The minority leader held an impromptu press conference last week assailing comments from Vought that the appropriations process should be more partisan going forward. On the floor, Schumer warned Republicans that any passage of a spending cuts package with just GOP votes would poison the well for the September funding talks. Sen. Tim Kaine, a Democrat who voted against the stopgap funding bill in March, told CNN that Schumer clearly has taken lessons from the spring and carried them forward to this moment. 'I definitely know in the aftermath of that, he called all 47 of us. We were on recess the following week, he called all 47. What do you think? What should we do differently next time? I mean he's been very diligent in trying to seek advice and then also engage in significant discussions in the caucus about CRs and spending battles,' Kaine said. There are signs that some Senate Democrats – even those who were willing to vote for a stopgap measure to keep the government open last time – aren't as willing to repeat the move. A number of Democrats are also clamoring for Republicans to put in writing that any spending deal they agree to won't be reversed later with a GOP-only package to pull back funding for programs they don't like. 'I don't understand what it means to negotiate an appropriations deal with Republicans unless they have put in writing that there will be no rescissions and no impoundment,' Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, said. But Democrats like Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, who voted with Schumer to keep the government open in the Spring, warned the most important thing is that Republicans and Democrats in the Senate agree that they, not the executive branch, should be making the spending calls. 'This really shouldn't be a partisan issue. It's a which branch of government are you in and what kind of oversight to you want to have over the executive?' she said. As for what Democrats learned from the spring fight, Shaheen offered one piece of guidance that she thinks Schumer is exercising now. 'I think in terms of lessons learned, I think the big lesson was we should have talked about it sooner and made it clear sooner what we thought was important to do.' In the House, some Democrats are also warning that early talk of a funding plan may help manage expectations from Democratic voters. 'A lot of people are looking for that silver bullet or that hidden stake that is going to take out Trump. Standing up on the appropriations bill is not going to be that,' Rep. Adam Smith, a Democrat from Washington, said. As for the GOP, many Republicans argue it's up to Democrats to decide how contentious the next eight weeks will be. 'Democrats need to decide do you want a deal? Do you want a shut down? Do you want a CR? What do you want to do? It's really not our choice,' House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole said. 'I think a shutdown is a losing game for them. They should have learned that last time, but they beat up poor Chuck Schumer when he did the right thing, kept the government open and accepted the CR.'
CNN
5 hours ago
- CNN
‘We learned some lessons': How Chuck Schumer and Democrats are gearing up for the next funding fight with Trump
Democrats will soon face a significant test of their willingness to take on President Donald Trump with a fall funding deadline fast-approaching. And this time, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer doesn't want to become his party's bogeyman. Months after a contentious fight that put him at the center of anti-Trump Democratic outrage, Schumer is already taking steps to avoid, once again, being put in an impossible position between Democratic voters gunning for an ugly shutdown fight with Trump and his party's long-time stance that Democrats should fund the government. This time, they don't want to find themselves with little leverage to get out of a government shutdown with a Republican president. Members say Schumer's strategy is to start laying the groundwork early for what will be a contentious and unpredictable post-August recess with the hope of avoiding the 'Democrats in disarray' narrative that plagued the party in the spring. 'We learned some lessons on what to do and not to do,' one Democratic senator said of the difference between now and the March funding fight. 'Schumer's working on trying to find a path that unifies us.' On Tuesday, Democrats held a lengthy caucus-wide meeting on the path ahead and the Senate minority leader met with his House counterpart, Hakeem Jeffries, later in the day. Members and aides caution there is no formal plan yet for how to tackle Democrats' next showdown with Trump, but it's clear Schumer wants to shield his party from the intense backlash it faced from their voters in March – and avoid his own black eye in the process. Finding consensus, however, won't be easy nor is it a guarantee in a diverse caucus where just nine members joined Schumer in voting with Republicans in March to keep the government open. Since then, Democrats' reasons for challenging Trump have only grown. Republicans passed a massive tax and spending cuts bill that included historic slashes to Medicaid and food programs with just GOP votes. Republicans also voted last week to claw back $9 billion in federal funds for foreign aid and public broadcasting that had already been appropriated by Congress. 'Here's where I am. Unless the Republicans agree to a no rescissions clause, a vote on an appropriations bill is a fake,' Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, told CNN. King was among those in the caucus who voted with Schumer and the GOP to keep the government open, but now King says he has not decided yet if he'd be willing to do that again in the fall. 'Why vote for an appropriation bill if two weeks from now they can submit a rescissions package and undo everything that is in the bill?' King asked. 'Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. I am not going to be fooled twice.' The challenge for Democrats is that they are finding themselves between two realities. On the one hand, Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought and conservatives on Capitol Hill are signaling a willingness for steeper budget cuts that reflect the massive slashes from Trump's Department of Government Efficiency. On the other, Senate Democrats are also working cooperatively with Republicans on the appropriations panel to pass several of the bills to fund military and veterans, agriculture and the legislative branch with broad bipartisan support. And they realize that if the government does shut down –- they may not have the leverage to reopen it. 'There is a real tension between Russ Vought and OMB and the rescissions vote, which are going right at a stable, steady appropriations process and what has been happening on committee so far,' Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, the top Democrat on the Defense appropriations subcommittee, said. Tuesday night, most Senate Democrats joined Republicans on a procedural vote to advance the military and veterans spending bill on the floor, and Schumer signaled that Democrats don't want to stand in the way of advancing bipartisan spending bills that his members have worked hard on. But, there is still a number of factors outside of Schumer's control. For one, House Republicans will manage their appropriations process. Already, conservatives are laying the groundwork for a full revolt if Speaker Mike Johnson tries to move ahead with a stopgap government funding measure known as a continuing resolution rather than passing all 12 individual spending bills. And even if the House could pass the dozen bills with their tight majority, they would many are likely to be nonstarters in the Senate where Republicans need 60 votes to advance their bills. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries signaled this week that Democrats were in no mood to help Republicans pass those bills. 'It's my expectation that if Republicans tried to jam a highly partisan spending bill down the throats of the American people here in the House we'll reject it,' the New York Democrat said when asked by CNN if he would take the same tactic as last year in rejecting GOP spending bills. 'At the end of the day, Republicans control the trifecta,' Sen. Mark Warner, a Democrat, said of the unpredictability of the next few months for the party. In March, Schumer defended his decision to vote with Republicans to keep the government open. He argued that not doing so would give Trump more power, not less. And he downplayed the divisions within his ranks even as some members openly clashed with him over his decision. But in recent weeks, Schumer has signaled he's open to preparing a number of options depending on how the spending talks unfold, and Democratic members say he has been deeply engaged for weeks on how to manage the September fight. The minority leader held an impromptu press conference last week assailing comments from Vought that the appropriations process should be more partisan going forward. On the floor, Schumer warned Republicans that any passage of a spending cuts package with just GOP votes would poison the well for the September funding talks. Sen. Tim Kaine, a Democrat who voted against the stopgap funding bill in March, told CNN that Schumer clearly has taken lessons from the spring and carried them forward to this moment. 'I definitely know in the aftermath of that, he called all 47 of us. We were on recess the following week, he called all 47. What do you think? What should we do differently next time? I mean he's been very diligent in trying to seek advice and then also engage in significant discussions in the caucus about CRs and spending battles,' Kaine said. There are signs that some Senate Democrats – even those who were willing to vote for a stopgap measure to keep the government open last time – aren't as willing to repeat the move. A number of Democrats are also clamoring for Republicans to put in writing that any spending deal they agree to won't be reversed later with a GOP-only package to pull back funding for programs they don't like. 'I don't understand what it means to negotiate an appropriations deal with Republicans unless they have put in writing that there will be no rescissions and no impoundment,' Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, said. But Democrats like Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, who voted with Schumer to keep the government open in the Spring, warned the most important thing is that Republicans and Democrats in the Senate agree that they, not the executive branch, should be making the spending calls. 'This really shouldn't be a partisan issue. It's a which branch of government are you in and what kind of oversight to you want to have over the executive?' she said. As for what Democrats learned from the spring fight, Shaheen offered one piece of guidance that she thinks Schumer is exercising now. 'I think in terms of lessons learned, I think the big lesson was we should have talked about it sooner and made it clear sooner what we thought was important to do.' In the House, some Democrats are also warning that early talk of a funding plan may help manage expectations from Democratic voters. 'A lot of people are looking for that silver bullet or that hidden stake that is going to take out Trump. Standing up on the appropriations bill is not going to be that,' Rep. Adam Smith, a Democrat from Washington, said. As for the GOP, many Republicans argue it's up to Democrats to decide how contentious the next eight weeks will be. 'Democrats need to decide do you want a deal? Do you want a shut down? Do you want a CR? What do you want to do? It's really not our choice,' House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole said. 'I think a shutdown is a losing game for them. They should have learned that last time, but they beat up poor Chuck Schumer when he did the right thing, kept the government open and accepted the CR.'
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Judge Torches Trump For Turning Into Henry II With His Wild Rants
A federal judge compared Donald Trump to Henry II for his blatant efforts to punish his administration's critics. While overseeing a lawsuit Monday concerning the Trump administration's crackdown on noncitizens' pro-Palestinian speech, U.S. District Judge Willliam Young referred to the twelfth-century English king while mulling whether the president's penchant for publicizing his every personal problem ever inspired his underlings to take action. Young cited Henry II's famous line, 'Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?' The offhand remark led errant knights to murder Thomas Becket, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who'd sought to increase the power of the Catholic Church. Trump 'doesn't have errant knights, but he's got Stephen Miller,' Young quipped, according to Politico's senior legal correspondent Kyle Cheney. Young pointed out that whenever the president had a problem with someone, especially in government, that person tended to find themselves facing a spate of problems they hadn't had before. For example, after Trump had his explosive feud with Elon Musk, the government began to review its contracts with SpaceX. After beefing for months with Senator Adam Schiff, last week, the president accused him of 'mortgage fraud' and said he should 'pay the price of prison.' Young also questioned Trump's motor-mouthed attitude, while his administration appeared intent on violating the First Amendment. 'The president is a master of speech and certainly brilliantly uses his right to free speech,' said Young. 'Whether he recognizes or not whether other people have any right to free speech is questionable.' Last week, Young heard testimony from four veteran officers from the Department of Homeland Security who recounted their superiors' unusual requests to arrest green card holders and noncitizen academics who had committed no crime.
