Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
S.F. judge upholds state privacy law cited in prosecution of antiabortion activists
Hat tip, ChipSF at Joe.My.God.
Judge Reverses On Removal Of Confederate Memorial, Says Its Supporters Lied About “Disturbed Gravesites”
December 20, 2023
{snip}
ChipSF
18 minutes ago
O/T:
From today's SF Chronicle; the anti-abortionists who secretly recorded a Planned Parenthood meeting & were charged with eight felonies, have now lost their appeal. And that is on top of the $ 2 million damages they were forced to pay when they lost a civil case!
https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/sf-judge-upholds-state-privacy-law-used-18564222.php
18 minutes ago
O/T:
From today's SF Chronicle; the anti-abortionists who secretly recorded a Planned Parenthood meeting & were charged with eight felonies, have now lost their appeal. And that is on top of the $ 2 million damages they were forced to pay when they lost a civil case!
https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/sf-judge-upholds-state-privacy-law-used-18564222.php
POLITICS
S.F. judge upholds state privacy law cited in prosecution of antiabortion activists
By Bob Egelko
Dec 19, 2023
A San Francisco judge has upheld California’s law against recording private conversations without the speakers’ consent, rejecting a challenge by two antiabortion activists who posed as fetal researchers to enter national meetings of abortion providers and secretly record their discussions.... David Daleiden, leader of an antiabortion group called Center for Medical Progress, and Sandra Merritt, an employee, have both been charged with eight felony violations of the state law. Prosecutors say they identified themselves as researchers for Biomax Procurement Services, a nonexistent company, to gain access to conventions of the National Abortion Federation in San Francisco in 2014 and in Baltimore in 2015, as well as meetings of Planned Parenthood around that time.
After they posted videos of the meetings, which Planned Parenthood said had been heavily edited, the abortion groups said their members were subjected to harassment and death threats. Some states cited the videos when they cut off funding for Planned Parenthood. Daleiden and Merritt said they were acting as investigative journalists to expose fetal trafficking. Their trial is scheduled for March.
In a separate civil case, a federal court jury awarded more than $2 million in damages against Daleiden, Merritt and their colleagues in 2019 for acting fraudulently and violating nondisclosure agreements they had signed before entering the meetings. The U.S. Supreme Court denied review of their appeals two months ago.
In trying to block the criminal prosecutions, lawyers for Daleiden and Merritt contended the California law violated freedom of expression because it allows recording of conversations about some crimes, including kidnapping, bribery and domestic violence, while barring other recordings. The lawyers cited a ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in July striking down an Oregon law that prohibited secret recordings but allowed recording of discussions about some crimes as well as conversations with on-duty police officers.
{snip}
By Bob Egelko
https://twitter.com/egelko
https://www.facebook.com/SFChronicle/
Bob Egelko has been a reporter since June 1970. He spent 30 years with the Associated Press, covering news, politics and occasionally sports in Los Angeles, San Diego and Sacramento, and legal affairs in San Francisco from 1984 onward. He worked for the San Francisco Examiner for five months in 2000, then joined The Chronicle in November 2000.
His beat includes state and federal courts in California, the Supreme Court and the State Bar. He has a law degree from McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento and is a member of the bar. Coverage has included the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, the appointment of Rose Bird to the state Supreme Court and her removal by the voters, the death penalty in California and the battles over gay rights and same-sex marriage.
He can be reached at begelko@sfchronicle.com.
S.F. judge upholds state privacy law cited in prosecution of antiabortion activists
By Bob Egelko
Dec 19, 2023
A San Francisco judge has upheld California’s law against recording private conversations without the speakers’ consent, rejecting a challenge by two antiabortion activists who posed as fetal researchers to enter national meetings of abortion providers and secretly record their discussions.... David Daleiden, leader of an antiabortion group called Center for Medical Progress, and Sandra Merritt, an employee, have both been charged with eight felony violations of the state law. Prosecutors say they identified themselves as researchers for Biomax Procurement Services, a nonexistent company, to gain access to conventions of the National Abortion Federation in San Francisco in 2014 and in Baltimore in 2015, as well as meetings of Planned Parenthood around that time.
After they posted videos of the meetings, which Planned Parenthood said had been heavily edited, the abortion groups said their members were subjected to harassment and death threats. Some states cited the videos when they cut off funding for Planned Parenthood. Daleiden and Merritt said they were acting as investigative journalists to expose fetal trafficking. Their trial is scheduled for March.
In a separate civil case, a federal court jury awarded more than $2 million in damages against Daleiden, Merritt and their colleagues in 2019 for acting fraudulently and violating nondisclosure agreements they had signed before entering the meetings. The U.S. Supreme Court denied review of their appeals two months ago.
In trying to block the criminal prosecutions, lawyers for Daleiden and Merritt contended the California law violated freedom of expression because it allows recording of conversations about some crimes, including kidnapping, bribery and domestic violence, while barring other recordings. The lawyers cited a ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in July striking down an Oregon law that prohibited secret recordings but allowed recording of discussions about some crimes as well as conversations with on-duty police officers.
{snip}
By Bob Egelko
https://twitter.com/egelko
https://www.facebook.com/SFChronicle/
Bob Egelko has been a reporter since June 1970. He spent 30 years with the Associated Press, covering news, politics and occasionally sports in Los Angeles, San Diego and Sacramento, and legal affairs in San Francisco from 1984 onward. He worked for the San Francisco Examiner for five months in 2000, then joined The Chronicle in November 2000.
His beat includes state and federal courts in California, the Supreme Court and the State Bar. He has a law degree from McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento and is a member of the bar. Coverage has included the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, the appointment of Rose Bird to the state Supreme Court and her removal by the voters, the death penalty in California and the battles over gay rights and same-sex marriage.
He can be reached at begelko@sfchronicle.com.
