* About a month ago in the Tribune…

The State Board of Elections has asked Attorney General Kwame Raoul to consider legal action against the publisher of far-right faux newspapers and websites for publishing personal information about Illinois voters.

Matt Dietrich, a spokesman for the elections board, said the board has received dozens of complaints from voters asking how personal information got into the hands of the publisher, Local Government Information Services. The publication of that information on LGIS websites is a possible violation of a statutory prohibition on the use of voter identification other than for “bona fide political purposes,” the elections board said.

Dietrich said political committees registered with the state elections board are allowed to purchase voter data, containing names, addresses and birthdates, with an explicit prohibition on the use of the data for other business purposes. The board stopped collecting voter birthdates in 2018 for additional privacy protection.

LGIS, a purveyor of what has become known as “pink slime” journalism, operates dozens of websites in Illinois and throughout the country that try to disguise its far-right Republican campaign advocacy through mailers and websites with names that could be construed as those of legitimate newspapers such as “Chicago City Wire,” the “DuPage Policy Journal” and the “Will County Gazette.”

LGIS is operated by Brian Timpone, an ally and business partner of onetime failed gubernatorial candidate, political operative and right-wing radio talk show host Dan Proft of Naples, Florida.

* AG Raoul filed for a TRO and a preliminary injunction this week in Lake County…

Beginning in the weeks before the March 19, 2024 General Primary Election, Defendant has published thousands of articles containing Illinois voters’ birthdates, full street addresses and voting records. Defendant’s use of old voter registration information violates Illinois Election Code provisions that permitted disclosure of that information to political committees in the first instance. Defendant is not a political committee and could not lawfully obtain voters’ birthdates and street numbers otherwise. While Defendant may believe that it is providing some value to the community by sharing with the public the rate at which various precincts’ voters do vote, Defendant has no lawful claim to the information that it has obtained. And publishing voters’ birthdates and full street addresses has put voters at imminent risk of identity theft and has placed several categories of voters, such as members of the judiciary and law enforcement, in harm’s way.

The potential harm caused to Illinois voters by Defendant’s publications, including identity theft or worse, to their physical safety, will be irreparable. Defendant has ignored the State Board’s request that it pull the articles from its websites. So now, through this motion, Plaintiffs seek both temporary and preliminary injunctive relief to maintain the status quo, in the form of an order requiring Defendant to remove voters’ birthdates and street numbers from its online publications, and enjoining Defendant from publishing such information until such time as the Court can resolve this dispute.

* From the argument…

It is undeniable that an emergency exists. Defendant’s actions have put tens of thousands of Illinois voters at risk of identity theft. Further, some of the state’s most vulnerable citizens, as well as some of its most loyal servants, are now exposed to danger due to the publication of their home addresses—surely to no meaningful benefit to Defendant or the public. Defendant’s use of birthdates and street numbers, obtained most likely from a closely related political committee, is unlawful and Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim for such a declaratory judgment. To the extent Plaintiffs are even required to show irreparable harm, the likely harm to Illinois voters will be irreparable, and the fears of identity theft or physical harm are supported by the massive scale of Defendant’s improper publication of voter information. Likewise, the voters whose information is included in Defendant’s publication do not have an adequate remedy at law, thus requiring the Court to enjoin Defendant from publishing improperly obtained voter information.

* The violation…

Plaintiffs can certainly show that Defendant’s publication of sensitive voter data provided to political committees from 2016 and 2020 violates the Election Code. As explained in the Complaint, Defendant has obtained 2016 and 2020 voter registration data that would have been available only to political committees and merged that data to create lists of purported registered voters, publishing those lists in thousands of online articles. Defendant admits that it obtained the birthdates in its publications from files received in 2016, which likely came from a closely related political committee, and then combined that data with 2020 data.

But regardless of how Defendant obtained the 2016 and 2020 registration information, it is not a political committee. As such, Defendant has no right to use voter registration information provided to political committees pursuant to Sections 4-8, 5-7, and 6-35 of the Election Code. … Further, Defendant has no bona fide political purpose for sharing the confidential voter registration information that it has obtained because it is a for-profit news organization.

Moreover, while voter registration information is available to the public by the State Board as required under the NVRA, such information does not include sensitive voter information, including street numbers of home addresses and birthdates. Rather, the 2016 voter registration information that Defendant has obtained and merged with 2020 data, includes voters’ birthdates, which would have only been made available to a political committee that could not lawfully, under the Election Code, provide such information to Defendant. Compl. Defendant’s possession and publication of sensitive voter information from 2016 and 2020 is improper under the Election Code and Plaintiffs are entitled to injunctive relief preventing such violations of the Election Code.

* Conclusion…

WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, along with those stated in the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, Plaintiffs, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul on behalf of the People of the State of Illinois and the Illinois State Board of Elections, respectfully request that this Court enter a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction enjoining Defendant and its officers, agents, employees, and any other persons or entities within its control or working in concert with it, from publishing on its websites or in print information improperly obtained from 2016 and 2020 voter lists, including voters’ dates of birth and street addresses, and ordering Defendant to remove voters’ birthdates and street numbers from its articles about voter turnout in the 2020 general election during the pendency of this case.

Verified complaint is here. Emergency motion is here.