Jackson v. Whitepages, Inc.

What happened

In 2021, West Virginia passed its own version of Daniel's Law. New Jersey's Daniel's Law lets police, judges, prosecutors, and their families require data brokers to stop publishing their home addresses and unpublished phone numbers. West Virginia copied that goal but wrote the details differently.

In 2024, Michael Jackson, a retired West Virginia law enforcement officer, brought a proposed class action against Whitepages under the statute for publishing his home address. He sued on behalf of himself and other covered officials, active, formerly active, and retired. Whitepages responded with a facial First Amendment challenge, arguing the law itself was unconstitutional.

On August 19, 2025, the Northern District of West Virginia struck the provision down. West Virginia officers cannot enforce it while that ruling stands.

What the court held

The challenged provision was Section E of West Virginia's version of Daniel's Law, at W. Va. Code § 5A-8-24(e). The court found it is a content-based restriction on speech: it singles out one category of true facts, the home addresses and phone numbers of certain officials, and bars publishing them.

Content-based restrictions get strict scrutiny, the most demanding constitutional test. The state has to show the law serves a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored, with no less-restrictive way to reach the same goal.

The court agreed the state's interest, protecting officers and their families from targeted violence, is compelling. That part was not in dispute. The case turned on tailoring, and two defects sank the statute.

First, no notice requirement. Liability attached the moment a broker published the information, so the broker had no chance to take the listing down first. New Jersey's Daniel's Law, by contrast, gives a broker 10 business days to comply after it receives written notice. The court treated that notice step as a less-restrictive option West Virginia left out.

Second, no knowledge requirement. The law could be used against a publisher who had no idea the information belonged to a covered official. The court held that imposing liability with no mental-state floor is not narrowly tailored.

With neither notice nor a knowledge requirement, the statute failed strict scrutiny. The court did not decide whether a rewritten version would survive.

The same question in New Jersey

The knowledge question is not unique to West Virginia. In Atlas v. We Inform, the Third Circuit certified a question to the New Jersey Supreme Court: what mental state, if any, a publisher must have before it is liable under New Jersey's Daniel's Law. The New Jersey Supreme Court accepted that question in October 2025. How it answers will shape whether these laws hold up under the First Amendment.

Why this matters to officers

If you are a West Virginia officer, you cannot use the state Daniel's Law right now. It is on the books but unenforceable while the ruling stands. Your other options:

• The federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act (DPPA). It restricts sharing personal information that came from motor vehicle records, with liquidated damages of $2,500 per violation. It is federal, but it reaches only DMV-sourced data.
• Privacy claims under West Virginia common law. Slower, and decided case by case.
• Public-records exemptions for active investigations and personnel files. Narrow reach.

If you are outside West Virginia, the lesson is about drafting. State Daniel's Law analogs are not interchangeable. New Jersey's text, with its notice step, survived this challenge. West Virginia's did not.

The West Virginia officer Whitepages incident page covers the underlying facts in more detail.

What the ruling does not say

The decision is narrow. It does not hold that state Daniel's Laws are categorically unconstitutional. It holds that this statute, as written, does not survive strict scrutiny. That leaves room for the West Virginia legislature to rewrite it.

The court did not reach:

• Whether a notice-and-cure provision alone would have saved the statute
• Whether the federal DPPA preempts state analogs (it does not, but that was not at issue)
• Whether West Virginia would survive if it copied New Jersey's text exactly

Those questions are open.

Where the case stands

The Northern District of West Virginia opinion is a trial-court ruling. It is a strong candidate for appeal to the Fourth Circuit, which could affirm, reverse, or send it back. Confirm the current appeal status before relying on the case either way.

The court's narrow reasoning also leaves room for the legislature to pass a revised statute that adds the notice and knowledge steps the court found missing. Check current West Virginia legislative records before assuming the law is still down.

What this means for your exposure

A court ruling does not take your address off a broker site. Whether or not a state law is enforceable, the listing stays up until someone gets it removed. Frontline Privacy finds where your personal information is published and files removal requests, which lowers your exposure regardless of which law currently applies.

Sources

• Troutman Pepper Locke (Aug. 22, 2025): West Virginia's Daniel's Law held facially unconstitutional
• Reason / Volokh Conspiracy (Aug. 20, 2025): Court strikes down W. Va. "doxing" law
• Opinion, Jackson v. Whitepages, Inc., No. 1:24-cv-80 (N.D. W. Va. Aug. 19, 2025): govinfo.gov