PogoWasRight.org

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy
Menu

Judge Keeps Strippers’ Info Away From Praying Man

Posted on August 14, 2015June 26, 2025 by Dissent

Nick McCann reports on a case that made me blink:

A group of Washington strippers and club managers do not have to disclose their personal information requested by a man who wants to pray for them, a federal judge ruled.

Tacoma resident David Van Vleet filed a Public Records Act request with the Pierce County auditor as a private citizen, seeking the personal information of dancers at DreamGirls at Fox’s, a strip club in Parkland, Washington.

Van Vleet told local reporters that he requested the information because he wanted to pray for them.

“I’m a Christian,” Van Vleet said. “We have a right to pray for people.”

Now you might guess that Van Vleet went to court because his public records request was denied and that our right to privacy would trump his self-proclaimed right to pray for us. But you’d be wrong, my privacy-conscious friends and readers:

Auditor Julie Anderson said she would disclose the information to Van Vleet unless the dancers got a court injunction.

The DreamGirls employees sued to bar Anderson from disclosing their personal information to Van Vleet or any other members of the public, including names, birth dates and photos.

Read more on Courthouse News. Ironically, perhaps, Van Vleet refused to provide his own contact details to the court.

Update: Eugene Volokh also discussed this case, here.

No related posts.

Category: CourtFeatured NewsU.S.Workplace

Post navigation

← Windows 10 found talking to remote servers despite privacy settings
Facial Recognition Technology Is Big Business — And It’s Coming For You →

Search

Contact Me

Email: info[at]pogowasright.org
Security Issue: security[at]pogowasright.org
Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight
Signal: +1 516-776-7756
DMCA Concern: dmca[at]pogowasright.org

Research Report of Note

A report by EPIC.org:

State Attorneys General & Privacy: Enforcement Trends, 2020-2024

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Changes in the Rules for Disclosure for Substance Use Disorder Treatment Records: 42 CFR Part 2: What Changed, Why It Matters, and How It Aligns with HIPAAs
  • Always watching: How ICE’s plan to monitor social media 24/7 threatens privacy and civic participation
  • Who’s watching the watchers? This Mozilla fellow, and her Surveillance Watch map
  • EPIC Publishes New Whitepaper Detailing Privacy Risks of Government Data Mining Programs
  • Modern cars are spying on you. Here’s what you can do about it.
  • Attorney General James and Multistate Coalition Secure $5.1 Million from Education Software Company for Failing to Protect Students’ Data       
  • EU Parliament committee votes to advance controversial Europol data sharing proposal

RSS Recent Posts at DataBreaches.net

  • Short-term renewal of cyber information sharing law appears in bill to end shutdown
  • Yanluowang ransomware IAB pleads guilty
  • Lawsuit Alleges Ex-Intel Employee Hid 18,000 Sensitive Documents Prior to Leaving the Company
  • HIPAA, but for non-Covered Entities?
  • Manassas City Public Schools close on Monday due to cyberattack
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.