Federal Appeals Court Strikes Down West Virginia's Daniel's Law Restricting Public Officials' Data

West Virginia Law Deemed Unconstitutional

A federal appeals court has ruled West Virginia's Daniel's Law unconstitutional. This law aimed to prevent the disclosure of personal information belonging to law enforcement officers and judges. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's August 2025 decision nullifying the statute.

Reasons for the Ruling

The court found the West Virginia statute unlawfully restricts speech based on its topic, message, or subject matter, which is considered content-based speech. Additionally, the law was deemed to hold data brokers liable in too many circumstances. The opinion highlighted that the West Virginia statute differs from similar laws in other states by not requiring officials to alert businesses before suing and mandating that distributors know they are acting unlawfully.

Impact on Data Brokers and Other States

This decision represents a significant win for data brokers, which have faced increasing legal challenges regarding their business practices. The ruling could influence ongoing Daniel's Law litigation in New Jersey and potentially affect similar statutes in over a dozen other states, according to legal analysis.

Details of the Challenged Law

West Virginia's Daniel's Law mandated that data brokers obtain permission from judicial officers, prosecutors, public defenders, and law enforcement officers before publishing their personal data if a reasonable person would believe it could expose them to harassment or harm. The law permitted lawsuits seeking up to $1,000 per violation, plus punitive damages. The class-action lawsuit challenging the law was brought by a retired law enforcement officer and others against online people-search services like WhitePages, Thomson Reuters, LexisNexis, and PeopleConnect.