Data Brokers: A Threat to Public Servants’ Safety
▼ Summary
– A new report finds that comprehensive state consumer privacy laws fail to protect public servants, creating a “data-to-violence pipeline” by not allowing them to remove personal data from public records.
– The analysis of 19 state privacy laws shows none let public servants compel agencies to redact their data from public sources or include a “private right of action” for individuals to sue over violations.
– Violent threats against public servants, especially local officials like school board members, have increased significantly, with threatening statements far outpacing physical attacks.
– A case example highlights the danger, where an alleged assassin used “people search engines” to obtain a state representative’s home address from readily available public records.
– The report advocates for new legislation to protect public servants’ privacy, suggesting measures like regulating the remote accessibility of digitized public records instead of eliminating them.
A recent analysis reveals a critical gap in state-level consumer privacy laws, leaving public servants vulnerable to targeted threats through the easy availability of their personal information. This situation creates a dangerous pathway where sensitive data can be weaponized against individuals serving in government roles. The report underscores that while comprehensive privacy regulations grant consumers certain rights, they fail to provide specific protections for civil servants, allowing their home addresses and other details to remain readily accessible and salable.
The study, conducted by researcher Justin Sherman, examines the intersection of privacy law and public safety. It focuses on the traditional definition of doxing: the malicious publication of private information like a home address with the intent to cause harm. Sherman’s review of 19 different state consumer privacy laws found a consistent and troubling pattern. These laws permit individuals to request that data brokers not sell personal information gathered from private sources. However, they offer no mechanism for public servants to have their data removed from public records held by state agencies. Furthermore, the laws do not stop brokers from selling information, including home addresses, sourced from public databases like property records or court filings.
Compounding the issue, none of these statutes include a private right of action. This legal provision would empower individuals to personally sue for violations of the privacy law, creating a stronger deterrent against misuse. The combined effect is a system where information on public employees is uniquely exposed, while they possess uniquely few legal tools to control its spread or commercial sale.
This exposure occurs against a backdrop of escalating threats. A separate analysis of over 1,600 threats made between 2015 and 2025 found that violent intimidation targeting public servants is rising sharply. Threats against local officials, such as school board members and election workers, constituted nearly one-third of the cases reviewed. The research also indicates that threatening communications occur at a rate nearly nine times higher than physical attacks, with one form of aggression often escalating into another.
The risks are not evenly distributed. A 2024 report noted that women and Democratic officeholders report experiencing a greater increase in the severity of abuse since taking office compared to their male and Republican counterparts. The real-world consequences are tragically clear. In a recent case, a man charged with a homicide at a state representative’s home was found with handwritten lists containing dozens of officials’ names and addresses, alongside a list of 11 people search engines. These sites allow anyone to find personal details for a small fee, illustrating how easily public records can be aggregated and used for malicious purposes.
The report calls for new legislation specifically designed to safeguard the privacy of all public servants, including educators and locally elected officials who often fall outside existing federal or state protections. It proposes a balanced approach, suggesting lawmakers could focus on regulating how public records are digitized and accessed remotely, rather than sealing them off entirely. This would aim to preserve transparency for journalists and watchdog groups while making it harder for abusive individuals to exploit the system.
As the report’s author notes, the digital repackaging of public records by data brokers has fundamentally changed the threat landscape. In the past, accessing such information required knowing where to look and physically traveling to a records office. Today, that same data is aggregated and sold online, making it simple for a stalker or harasser to track a victim across state lines with a few clicks, turning public service into a potentially perilous undertaking.
(Source: Wired)
