Governor Evers Uses Heavy Hand of Government to Quash 1st Amendment

Wow.

MADISON – Gov. Tony Evers is standing by his child services officials who warned a reporter he could face jail time if he reported information from a confidential child abuse investigation.

Evers said Tuesday the Department of Children and Families acted appropriately by sending an NBC News reporter a cease and desist letter threatening legal action, a move that media law experts say is likely unconstitutional.

viagra sin receta, here, cialis, here

“I believe it’s appropriate that DCF protects the kid in this case. Somebody’s got to stick up for that young kid who was deemed to be abused,” Evers told reporters Tuesday. “Somebody’s got to stand up for the kid, and we did and I support that.”

DCF officials sought to block NBC News reporter Mike Hixenbaugh from publishing information from a confidential child abuse investigation file, saying reporting such information would violate state law and could result in six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.

As we put more and more privacy laws from HIPAA to FERPA to others, this is becoming more of an issue. Business and government officials hide their abuses and wrongdoing behind these laws and use them to thwart the people’s ability to get to the truth.

 

12 Responses to Governor Evers Uses Heavy Hand of Government to Quash 1st Amendment

  1. dad29 says:

    Tokin’Tony wants to bury the misdeeds of his ‘child abuse prevention’ bunch.

  2. Le Roi du Nord says:

    dud:

    Did you miss this part:

    “State law requires such information be kept confidential to ensure the privacy of children who are or suspected to be victims of abuse, and carries criminal penalties if documents or details contained in child abuse investigation files are released”.

  3. Mark Hoefert says:

    Did you miss this part:

    Obviously you missed the part about two Supreme Court decisions affirming that the 1st Amendment protects publication of information required to be confidential by state law.

    And you must have missed school the day that they taught that the Supremacy Clause means that the federal constitution takes precedence over state constitutions.

    And the state official is trying to walk back the intent of the letter:

    “McCarthy said Tuesday the department did not intend to threaten prosecution with its letter to NBC News.”

    I think Dad29 perfectly understands.

     

     

     

  4. Jason says:

    >Didyou miss this part:  “State law requires …. blah blah requirement”

     

    We all know you and Jiffy missed this part in the previous weeks discussion about how the WEC is violating state law: “state law requires the state to take people off the voter rolls 30 days after sending the letters if the voters hadn’t responded by then. ”

     It just shows you like to cherry pick laws that fit your narrow and childish viewpoint.  So go ahead and quote it today… INCORRECTLY, I might add as Mark has just schooled you.

  5. dad29 says:

    C’mon, Mark and Jason…….LeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRoy is an apparatchik and loyal to his tribe.  The State and its minions are always right!!  Hail!!  Kneel before Zod!!

     

  6. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Good one Dad29.

  7. jjf says:

    Dad29, you are so proud of yourself!  So apply it to others…  can you spot anyone around here loyal to the Orange God?

  8. jjf says:

    Jason, your understanding of all the contested issues in the voter roll case is quite superficial.  What does “reliable” mean to you, and to the law?  If I gave you a method that demonstrated a 7% false positive rate, would you consider it reliable?

  9. Mar says:

    This all depends on what the particular media is going to report. If the media is just going to report what’s in just in the child reports, then I think it is illegal to report.
    But in the story, they are not going to use the report, but used court records and other information, then nothing is wrong.
    Reports of alleged child abuse from DCF files are often inaccurate, especially if a parent is pissed off at another parent.
    But if they can get records from other sources, then the midia has a right to write those stories.

  10. Jason says:

    >Jason, your understanding of all the contested issues in the voter roll case is quite superficial.  What does “reliable” mean to you, and to the law?  If I gave you a method that demonstrated a 7% false positive rate, would you consider it reliable?

     

    Are you disputing your lover’s previous statement of the LAW is the LAW?

     

    >Did you miss this part: “State law requires….”

     

    Ah, you’re a cherry picker as well.  The law says this, but I can twist and interpret it to mean that.  Glad you’re not a judge…. Oh Yeah, you also ignore the fact that an actual Judge disagrees with your “non-superficial” mis-understanding…  Must be tough being so flaccid with your convictions.

  11. jednick says:

    Figuring out the interplay between state law and First Amendment case law is above my pay grade. I just wanted to offer background that Wisconsin has always been incredibly strict about a child’s records, which are presumed to be unavailable unless at least one of a list of exceptions is met. That’s the opposite of other open records, which are presumed to be available unless there’s an exception to keep them closed. These rules are in both the Children’s Code (minor victims) and the Juvenile Justice Code (delinquency), and are entwined with the statutory mandate of protecting “the best interests of the child”.

  12. dad29 says:

    The Milwaukee DA has filed charges in the case–so there is PLENTY of “public information.”

    Evers is trying to bury the mis-deeds of his Department of Family Services, which in this case, are damned serious.

    Lots more will come out in the trial, and the bureaucrats are going to take a beating.  THAT is what Tokin’Tony is worried about.  See, Bureaucrat = Tony.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.