David Daleiden Succeeds in Appeal Surrounding University of Washington’s Baby Body Parts Docs

SEATTLE, Wash. — An appeals court has overturned a lower court ruling in regard to the redaction of certain information from documents from the University of Washington that were requested by pro-life activist David Daleiden surrounding the institution’s transferral and use of the body parts of aborted babies.

Daleiden, who operates the Center for Medical Progress and is most known for his undercover investigation into the practices of the abortion giant Planned Parenthood, had sent a Freedom of Information Act request last year to the university in an effort to obtain documents surrounding its business dealings with abortion facilities.

Following the request, complainants including eight individuals with the University of Washington, three employees with area hospitals, a Planned Parenthood worker and a former Planned Parenthood worker filed suit against both the university and Daleiden in an effort to have their personal identifying information redacted. However, not only did the plaintiffs seek an injunction for themselves, but also on behalf of a class of a potential 600 people.

They argued that the release of identifying information could place them in harm’s way, resulting in “threats, harassment and violence.”

“Mr. Daleiden’s broad-ranging investigation into the trafficking of aborted fetal remains led him to look into the University of Washington’s fetal tissue research and acquisition practices,” Special Counsel Peter Breen with the Thomas More Society outlined in a statement on Wednesday.

“He asked that names and personal contact info be redacted from the records, but the abortion advocates and government employees pressed for full censorship, even of entity names, job titles, and departments within the university,” he noted. “Such heavy redactions render these public documents useless for investigative purposes.”

In November, U.S. District Judge James Robart sided with the plaintiffs, ordering the university to redact all identifying information of persons involved, including their names, email addresses, phone numbers and job titles.

  • Connect with Christian News

“Even if the research in which [the workers] participate or to which they contribute does not fall within the ambit of First Amendment protection, the groups with which [they] have participated or associated do engage in advocacy for the health and reproductive rights of women,” he wrote.

Daleiden appealed the ruling, stating that disclosure will not infringe on the entities’ constitutional rights.

“The plaintiffs’ claim is specious. No one has a right to privacy in e-mail communications with state employees that are sent to a state-owned e-mail account and that concern official state business,” the appeal read. “Nor does one have a right to privacy in business transactions conducted with state entities.”

On Monday, a three-judge panel with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously overturned Robart’s ruling, stating that the complainants have not proven at as many as 600 people could be harmed as a result of the release of the documents.

“The district court relied on a blanket finding that the entire putative class was engaged in protected First Amendment activity—a class that the University says could be as large as 600 people, although notices were sent to only 156 people according to the record,” the short, four-page ruling read.

“The district court then found that the entire putative class would likely face threats, harassment and violence if the records were disclosed without redaction, a danger that the court concluded would impermissibly chill protected First Amendment activity.”

The court also opined that it had not been proven that those represented in the suit were engaged in protected activities.

“Although we agree with the district court that there may be a basis for redaction where disclosure would likely result in threats, harassment, and violence, the court’s order did not address how the Doe Plaintiffs have made the necessary clear showing with specificity as to the different individuals or groups of individuals who could be identified in the public records,” it stated.

“The district court also made no finding that specific individuals or groups of individuals were engaged in activity protected by the First Amendment and what that activity was.”

The panel remanded the case back to the district court to further consider how the release of any identifying information would violate the class’ First Amendment rights. While it left the temporary injunction in place pending Robart’s review, Daleiden’s attorneys cheered the outcome.

“The court of appeals, by reversing this decision and remanding this case back to [the] district court, has prevented a serious threat to the public’s right to know how their tax dollars are being spent,” Breen said.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, because of your generous support, we have received enough funds to send many audio Bibles to Iraqi and Syrian refugees displaced by ISIS in the Middle East. Many have been distributed and received with gladness. While we provide for the physical needs of the people, we seek to provide the eternal hope only found in Jesus Christ through the word of God. Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? Please click here to send an audio Bible to a refugee family >>

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Sid Atkins

    This animal David Delidan edited videos to blackmail planned parenthood,a wonderful organization that prevents uninteded pregnancy

    • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

      There’s no way to spin this positively. The man is a hero, exposing murder and corruption of the worst kind.

    • InTheChurch

      You are the only person that can make a chop shop sound like an ethical business.

    • You are a spiritually sick individual that needs Christ Jesus in your life.

    • Garbage Adams

      That is shocking and horrible.

    • Jerome Horwitz

      Really?

    • Charlene

      Is this a joke?

      Baby killing – “a wonderful organization”?

      You would have loved the Third Reich, they were into killing people they regarded as disposable.

  • MCrow

    This annoys me as a privacy advocate, but then, I use a dummy account and VPN, so I’m a bit paranoid

  • Guest✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    This guy’s a hero. He’s like the brave, principled men and women who fought to overturn slavery.

    • Garbage Adams

      Look him up on Wikipedia sometime and then tell us how much of a hero he is.

  • james blue

    There has been a history of terrorist acts committed by “pro life” activists. People have the right to have identifying information redacted when it would put them in danger.

    • The real terrorists are the ones that murder the babies then slice and dice them for retail. That is sick demonic and demented beyond belief.

      • james blue

        Not relevant to the issue in the article.

        • Jerome Horwitz

          Yes, it is. In fact, that’s the only thing that is relevant.

          • james blue

            The only relevant thing to THIS issue is identifying information on these documents and the safety of the people they identify. Any information Daleiden might need for his “expose” can be achieved with personally identifiable information redacted.

          • Jerome Horwitz

            No. These people are criminals. They’ve done things that make the Nazis look like Scandinavian schoolboys.

            They don’t deserve protection, especially Miss Lamborghini. They deserve arrest, trial, conviction and execution.

          • james blue

            For what? Like it or not they have not broken any actual laws and as we have seen “pro life” activists have identified people, published their personal details including home addresses and have committed acts of terrorism against them.

          • Jerome Horwitz

            Killing babies and vivisecting them to harvest parts for profit IS a crime, sport.

          • james blue

            Every state investigation found no evidence of that. Every state investigation found they operated within the bounds of the law.

            As I said, the issue HERE has nothing to do with your views on abortion. It has to do with personal identifying information.

          • Jerome Horwitz

            That’s a load of bull. They openly talk about doing it in the videos. Did you think they were just kidding?

          • james blue

            The SAME videos the state investigators viewed in their investigations?

            Do you know what the law is in regard to fetal tissue donation?

          • Jerome Horwitz

            And they are not entitled to any protection because of what they are doing to human beings.

            You may wish to defend that crap, but I will never, ever do that. That way no one will ever accuse me of not having a soul.

          • james blue

            Of course they are entitled to protection. They work in a legal field.

            Do you agree with the assassination of Dr. Tiller? Do you agree with bombing? Do you agree with death threats called to the homes?

          • Jerome Horwitz

            This is not even about me. This is about something being done to human beings that’s evil and criminal. This is also about how you don’t seem to have a problem with that.

          • james blue

            My comment history, unlike yours, is open to public view. If you can find any comment I’ve made saying I’m okay with abortion please feel welcome to link to it.

            You didn’t answer my question

          • Jerome Horwitz

            You are saying you have no problem with this practice by defending it. In this thread.

          • james blue

            Focus here, because I’ve said it several times. The issue HERE is not abortion, it’s not fetal tissue donation. It’s about redacting personally identifying information from documents a “pro life” activist is asking for that could put the lives of people in danger from “radical pro life” activists with a history of violence that includes assasination.

            So now please answer my question Do you agree with the assassination of Dr. Tiller? Do you agree with bombing? Do you agree with death threats called to the homes? Are you defending that?

          • Jerome Horwitz

            It is about butchering human beings to harvest their parts for profit. Nothing else.

            Do NOT come in here talking about protecting the literal baby butchers before you talk about protecting those babies from said butchers.

            We’re done here.

          • james blue

            That you don’t answer the simple question is an answer.

            I am against abortion, but I will NEVER be with those who carry out acts of terrorism or agree with those acts. I am against abortion and because of your approval of acts of terrorism I most certainly am NOT with you.

          • Jerome Horwitz

            No, I refuse to answer the question because this isn’t about me. And it’s quite simply none of your business.

            And you are not against abortion if you are defending what these barbarians are doing.

            Don’t say you aren’t if you don’t wish to be called a liar. It’s right here, in this thread, black and white.

            Enough.

          • james blue

            But it is about me?

            By all means quote where I defended what they do.

          • bwgirl

            HE won’t care until it’s his turn to be butchered.

            And he doesn’t comprehend that he’s expendable by those the supports. Once they decide he’s fulfilled his usefulness or makes a wrong step, they’ll end him too!

  • Tianzhu

    Good man. God is on the side of life.

  • InTheChurch

    If states are allowing the removal of 10 commandments and crosses, why can’t they release names of professors and researchers that are buying body parts from PP?

    • james blue

      How are those connected?

      • InTheChurch

        You really don’t see the separation of church and state connection?

        • james blue

          To the issue in this article??? NO!!!!
          If I did I wouldn’t be asking.

  • May God continue to bless this man for shining the light of truth on this dark demonic industry.

    • LadyInChrist♥BlessedBeTheLord

      Amen.

  • mr goody two shoes

    Selling little murdered children’s body parts
    Those doing it need to be identified. No matter what the courts say. They trying to stop the identification are just as evil as those doing it.

  • Archie Angel

    You can smell the SIN on these people, corruption, one day they WILL answer before God.