Chris Perez -LAWANDCRIME.COM
Background: President Donald Trump speaks during a rally Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington, on the Ellipse near the White House. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)/Inset: A Seattle Police Department patch is seen on an officer’s uniform, July 17, 2016, in Seattle. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren, File).
A group of police officers who attended the “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, 2021 — where Donald Trump spoke ahead of the U.S. Capitol attack and told attendees, “If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore” — has been denied an appeal by Justice Elena Kagan after calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to keep their names and rally conduct under wraps, saying it violates their First Amendment “right to privacy” and “constitutes harassment” if police release the info in public incident reports.
Kagan, a Barack Obama appointee, rejected the group’s emergency application for a stay Tuesday after it was filed in late June with the nation’s highest court following an earlier and unanimous denial by the justices on June 4. The cops claimed in their latest application on June 25 that the last one did not address the “immediate harm” they said is now present due to the status quo being such that the officers’ identities were still anonymous because they were “litigating in pseudonym,” per the filing.
“As soon as this denial of stay was issued … the respondents attempted to alter the status quo at the trial court by filing a motion to force the petitioners to cease litigating in pseudonym,” the group’s application said. “On June 18, 2025, the King County Superior Court granted this requested relief, and issued an order barring the use of pseudonyms and unsealing the docket in this case.”
On June 23, the U.S. Court of Appeals confirmed the lower court’s order and denied the group’s emergency motion for a stay.
“Thus, now that an imminent harm has arisen, and it is without a doubt that there is no State Court mechanism to prevent the imminent harm,” the group said. “By requiring the [cops] to use their names in the case caption and unsealing the docket, the exact injury they are litigating against would be incurred as a result, undermining their ability to assert their First Amendment Privacy Rights in political beliefs and associations.”