On April 15, a U.S. District Court heard arguments in Utahns for Ethical Government v Barton. See this story.
The case was filed by the group that is submitting a petition on April 15 to get an initiative on the ballot. The group is afraid that if the names and addresses are made public, opponents of the initiative will contact the signers and ask them to retract their signatures. A new Utah law lets signers retract their names, up to several weeks after the petition is due. Attorneys for the state government apparently argue that the plaintiffs don’t have standing, so the judge apparently will hold a second hearing late in the day on standing. In the parallel case from Washington state, the lead plaintiff was “John Doe”, a signer who doesn’t want his name and address made public. Perhaps the Utah group didn’t realize that to guarantee there is no standing problem, that it should have an actual signer as a co-plaintiff.
You should think about linking to the more in depth coverage on the Salt Lake Tribune’s website instead of the shallow glances such as the broadcast story you linked to.
For example, this: http://www.sltrib.com/utahpolitics/ci_14885739
and this: http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_14892486
Thanks.