The Washington Supreme Court ruled in February that the officers do not have a right to remain anonymous.
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 4 declined to shield the identities of police officers fighting a public records request for information about their attendance at the Jan. 6, 2021, rally at the U.S. Capitol.
The new ruling came after the Washington Supreme Court ruled in February that the Seattle officers do not have a right to remain anonymous.
No justices dissented in the high court’s ruling in John Does 1, 2, 4, and 5 v. Seattle Police Department. Justice Samuel Alito attached a statement explaining his reasoning, and Justice Clarence Thomas joined the statement.
The four unidentified current and former Seattle law enforcement officers attended President Donald Trump’s rally and speech at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. They said they did not participate in the civil unrest that followed.
They also say they were investigated and cleared of wrongdoing.
The officers argue that including their names in court records would infringe their First Amendment rights and chill their ability to express political opinions.
Seattle officials have claimed that the rally was “for fascists and white supremacists,” and “have attempted to paint guilt by association, wondering aloud on the purpose for [the officers’] attendance at the rally, obviously insinuating they are tied to right wing extremists,” the officers’ application stated.
The application said that after the security breach at the Capitol in 2021, the Seattle Police Department ordered any police officers who attended the rally to report they attended and be investigated by the Office of Police Accountability (OPA).
After the four officers reported their presence at the rally, each one received a complaint from the OPA “alleging a possible violation of the law and [Seattle Police Department] policies by ‘trespassing on Federal property and/or participating in the planning and/or forced illegal entry of the U.S. Capitol Building that day,’” according to the application.
The investigation went beyond mere attendance at the rally and probed why they attended as well as “their political affiliations,” the application said.
