A Public Service Announcement

For the most part, I don't mind surprises.

Some surprises are fun.  Like surprise birthday parties or or gift exchanges at Christmas time.

Other surprises are not so fun.  Like the debit card I got the other day.  I hadn't applied for it - it just appeared in my mailbox.  

Then there was the small print.  A whole 12 page booklet of small print.  

The one section that caught my attention (the 8th time I read through) said:

Financial companies choose how they share your personal information.  Federal law gives consumers the right to limit some but not all sharing.  The types of personal information we collect and share includes: Social Security number and account balances, payment history and account transactions, transaction history and purchase history.  When you are no longer our customer, we continue to share your information.

It was that last line that really got me.  Well that and the notice that if I didn't opt-out of their debit card within 30 days of receipt (of a debit card I never wanted in the first place), that I would forever thereafter have my personal data shared with whomever they wanted.

I opted-out post haste!

Oh, and I didn't tell you the best part.  If I held on to this debit card, each time I used said debit card, I would be charged $2.  

Reloaded the card:                      $4

ATM withdrawal Fee:                   $2

An over-the-counter withdrawal:  $4 (or 2.75% whichever is more)

A check request:                          $15

Foreign Transaction surcharge:     4.0% 

Money Transfer Service Fee:      $3 per transaction

Debit card transfer Fee:               $3

Inactivity Fees (after 60 days):     $6/month

Yeah, this is quite the racket. 

The thing is, there are lots (that's "lots" as in A WHOLE BUNCH) of financial companies that send out these debit cards in hopes that you, the unsuspecting public will either ignore them (thereby opting-in to their scheme) or start using these debit cards.

I mentioned this to a neighbor the other day and he told me he gets lots of these things.  He never thought to read the fine print or opt-out.  Instead he always just shredded the cards and thought nothing of it.

Well, he thought nothing of it until I told him about that one section where they share his personal information with their partners forever and ever because he didn't opt-out of future promotions.

Maybe you've had a similar thing happen to you.  Maybe you got one of these and wanted to opt-out of future promotions.  Do you know what to do?

Following are a few things you can do to stop the promotions and/or get off these marketing lists:

1. Stop credit-related marketing lists

Use the official credit-bureau opt-out service run by OptOutPrescreen.com.

This removes you from lists used by banks for credit cards, insurance offers, many prepaid card offers, loan offers

This is how to do it:

• Website: https://www.optoutprescreen.com

• Phone: 1-888-5-OPT-OUT (1-888-567-8688)

You can choose:

• 5-year electronic opt-out (fastest)

• Permanent opt-out (requires printing and mailing a short form)

This works because it stops the marketing lists generated by the big credit bureaus:

• Equifax

• Experian

• TransUnion

• Innovis

2. Stop general advertising mail

Use the consumer opt-out list from the Direct Marketing Association.  Their service is called DMAchoice and their website is located at: https://www.dmachoice.org

This reduces catalog mail, marketing offers, random financial promotions, and many address-broker lists though there is a $2 processing fee for 10 years of protection (Which is a racket but you get what you pay for).

3. LexisNexis marketing profile

One of the biggest consumer data brokers is LexisNexis Risk Solutions.  Banks and insurance companies often use it to verify identity, buy targeted mailing lists, and/or check marketing demographics.

How to opt-out / suppress marketing use.  First, go to their website at https://consumer.risk.lexisnexis.com

Then complete these 2 steps:

1. Request your consumer disclosure report

2. Request suppression of marketing data

It takes all of about 5 minutes and they must comply under federal consumer laws.

4. CoreLogic consumer file

Another giant broker used heavily by lenders is CoreLogic.

They track things like home ownership, property value, mortgage info, and demographic profiles.

Banks often buy mailing lists like “homeowners aged 35-60 with stable income.”

How to Opt-out:

Visit https://www.corelogic.com/privacy and look for “Your Privacy Choices / Opt-Out.”

5. Data Axle (formerly Infogroup)

A massive marketing list provider is Data Axle.

They supply lists used for:

• credit offers

• insurance marketing

• prepaid debit card promotions

• catalogs

Opt-out: Visit their website at https://www.data-axle.com/ privacy/ and look for "Do Not Sell my Personal Information."

6. Credit-bureau marketing opt-out

The service run by the credit bureaus is OptOutPrescreen.com.

Good news!  Your Social Security Number ("SSN") is optional, (i.e. not required to use this service) and you can opt out using only your name, address, and date of birth.

The SSN field is just used to reduce mistaken identity if two people have similar names.  If you’re uncomfortable, just leave it blank.

7. Direct marketing lists

The Direct Marketing Association opt-out service (DMAchoice) does not ask for SSN at all.

With their website located at https://www.dmachoice.org/, they only require name, mailing address, and email (optional).

A safer strategy for identity-theft victims

Given your history, the single most effective protection is placing a credit freeze with the credit bureaus:

• Equifax

• Experian

• TransUnion

A credit freeze prevents new credit accounts from being opened, is free, does not affect your credit score, and can be temporarily lifted when you actually apply for credit.

Many identity-theft victims leave a freeze permanently in place.  I've had to do this twice and it works great.  It's not really permanent as you have to renew ever 10 years - but that's 10 years of not having to stress about your credit being jacked with.

Note, though, that a freeze with only one bureau isn’t enough.  Lenders can check any credit bureau.  If only one is frozen, a lender might still pull a report from another bureau and approve credit (because if they're not approving credit applications, they're not making money).

 

So, and ideally, you should freeze all three major bureaus:

• Equifax

• Experian

• TransUnion

Freezing all three typically takes about 10 minutes total online.

Once frozen, you will not get any no new credit cards applications, no loans requests, no store financing issues, and no fraudulent applications approved.  You simply temporarily lift the freeze when you actually need credit.

One thing about Experian.  It has been my experience (and, apparently, thousands of other people as well) that Experian is a pain to work with to freeze your credit.

Consequently, if you ever want to submit a freeze to Experian (without the hassle), following are two easier approaches than using their website:

1️⃣ Freeze by phone
Call Experian’s security freeze line:  1-888-397-3742

Tell the automated system you want to place a security freeze. The phone route is often simpler than the online system.

2️⃣ Freeze by mail (low-tech but effective)

You can mail a request with:

• Name

• Address

• Date of birth

• Copy of ID

• Copy of a utility bill

and send this information to:

Experian Security Freeze
P.O. Box 9554
Allen, TX 75013

They must process it under federal law.

Two other protections identity-theft victims often add

1️⃣ Fraud Alert (extra lender verification)
You can place a 1-year renewable fraud alert so lenders must take extra steps to verify identity before approving credit.

2️⃣ IRS Identity Protection PIN
Identity thieves sometimes shift to tax refund fraud once credit fraud stops.

The IRS offers an Identity Protection PIN (IP PIN) through the Internal Revenue Service.  This prevents anyone from filing a tax return in your name without your PIN.

Bonus trick (very effective):

When you get marketing mail:

1. Look for the tiny line that says something like
   “We obtained your name from a third-party data provider.”

2. Call or email the privacy contact and say:

“Please place me on your internal do-not-solicit list and remove my information from any marketing databases.”

Companies are legally required to honor internal opt-outs.

After doing these two opt-outs most people notice:

• far fewer credit card offers

• fewer “prepaid debit card” promotions 

• less insurance junk mail

It usually takes 30–60 days for the reduction to show up.

Having had my identity hit a number of time, I know that tips like these can really help rank and file consumer(s) feel less stressed and more protected.

So, when next you get something in the mail and you think it's a scam or think someone is just out to steal away your hard earned cash or your identity, realize that, yes, it is a scam and someone is just out to steal away your hard earned cash or that someone is out to steal your identity.

So, go with your gut and do everything you can think of to protect yourself. 

 

Go Ahead and Speak Your Mind

Have you ever noticed how most people really don't like being told they suck or are bad at their jobs?

I've had not a few irate people scream at me (over the years), because I wouldn't provide legal advice to people researching their legal questions.

But that's not what I'm talking about.

Nope, I'm taking about members of the city council.  I mean you'd think they way people scream at these guys (and gals) that they (the city councils of America) really don't have a clue about what they're doing!

And by their reactions, sometimes, I'm guessing they don't.

Take the case of  Noah Petersen, who was arrested for criticizing his mayor and police department.

 

Seems Mr. Petersen had written letters to the city council because he was upset about something.  After not getting a response, he decided to stand in front of his local city council and complain about how things were being done.

During the course of his monologue, Mr. Petersen stated that both the Mayor and the Chief of Police were "fascists"- which really didn't sit well with the Mayor who banged his gavel and, eventually, had Mr. Petersen arrested and removed from chambers.

The problem with all this is that the right to criticize the government is protected under our constitutional republic.  Pursuant to the 1st Amendment of the United State Constitution:

“Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

This single amendment protects the core right of citizens to criticize government, officials, laws, and policies.

The two clauses that are especially important (as they relate to criticizing government or speech, in general) are:

1. Freedom of Speech
   Protects verbal and expressive criticism of government actors and policies.

2. Right to Petition the Government
   Protects complaints, protests, and demands for change — historically understood as the right to criticize authority without fear of punishment.

The SCOTUS has repeatedly said that criticism of government is at the heart of the First Amendment, not at its edges and has said so in not a few cases, including:

• New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964)
  The Court held that public officials must tolerate harsh, inaccurate, and even offensive criticism, unless it is knowingly false and malicious.
  → This case exists specifically to protect criticism of government.

• Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949)
  Speech that “stirs people to anger” or “invites dispute” is still protected.
  → Government cannot silence speech simply because it is upsetting.

• City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451 (1987)
  The Court struck down a city ordinance banning verbal criticism of police officers.
  → The Court said “the First Amendment protects a significant amount of verbal criticism and challenge directed at police officers.”

Government officials try to get around the right to criticize government constantly, and the courts have been very clear—all such speech is protected.  Following are real-world breakdown of the most common methods, what officials claim, and how courts respond.

1. “You’re being disrespectful / negative / offensive”

What officials say: “This meeting must remain respectful.”

What they really mean: Stop criticizing us.

Why it fails:  The First Amendment does not protect only polite speech. In fact, criticism is often uncomfortable by nature.

Court response:  City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451 (1987): The First Amendment protects a significant amount of verbal criticism and challenge directed at police officers.

Bottom line: “Disrespect” is not a constitutional category.

2. “You’re off topic”

What officials say: “Please limit comments to agenda items.”

How it’s abused: Supporters are allowed to wander; critics are shut down.

Why it fails: Agenda limits must be evenly applied. Selective enforcement = viewpoint discrimination.

Court response: Courts consistently hold that unequal enforcement of meeting rules violates the First Amendment.

Under Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of the University of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819 (1995) the court held that viewpoint discrimination is an“egregious form of content discrimination.”  The Court made it clear that once the government allows speech on a topic, it cannot favor one side of that topic.  Thus, any uneven application of rules tied to perspective is unconstitutional. 

Bottom line: Rules aren’t illegal — biased enforcement is.

3. “You’re causing a disruption”

What officials say: "You’re disrupting the meeting."

What disruption actually means (legally):

• Physical obstruction

• Refusing to yield the floor

• Shouting so proceedings can’t continue

What it does not mean:

• Saying things officials don’t like

• Accusing them of corruption

• Speaking passionately

Court response: Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949)
Speech that provokes anger is protected.

Bottom line:  Offense does not equal disruption.

4. “This is a limited public forum — we can control speech”

What officials say:  “Public comment is a limited forum; we can restrict it.”

Why this fails:  Limited public forums still require viewpoint neutrality.

Court response:  In Frederick Douglass Foundation, Inc. v. District of Columbia, 41 F.4th 938 (D.C. Cir. 2023), the Court explicitly recognizes a First Amendment claim for selective enforcement based on viewpoint.  Government violates the First Amendment when it enforces rules against one viewpoint but not another, even without bad motive.   Consequently, selective enforcement of a law “in a viewpoint discriminatory way” states a First Amendment claim.

Bottom line:  “Limited forum” is not a magic eraser.

5. “We’re just enforcing decorum”

What officials say:  “We’re enforcing decorum rules.”

How courts see it:  Decorum rules must be:

• Narrow

• Clear

• Content-neutral

• Applied equally

Why this fails in practice:  “Decorum” is often undefined and used selectively.

Court response:  Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601 (1973): Vague rules chill speech and are unconstitutional.

Bottom Line: Vague/undefined rules are unenforceable

6. “We’re protecting staff safety”

What officials say:  “This speech makes people feel unsafe.”

Why it fails:  Emotional discomfort ≠ legal threat.

Court response:  Brandenburg v. Ohio, 495 U.S. 444 (1969): Only true threats or incitement to imminent violence are unprotected.

Bottom line:  Feeling unsafe is not the same as being unsafe.

7. “You violated meeting policy”

What officials say:   “Our policy doesn’t allow that kind of speech.”

Why it fails:  City policies do not override the U.S. Constitution.

Court response:  Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92 (1972): Local rules conflicting with constitutional rights are void.

8. “You can criticize us — just not here”

What officials say:  “Take that outside.”

Why it fails:  If public comment is allowed, criticism must be allowed too.

Court response:  City of Madison Joint School District v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission, 429 U.S. 167 (1976): Silencing dissent at the only official forum for public input is unconstitutional.

Bottom Line:  If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. 

So, what can you do about city council's violating your 1st amendment rights (to criticize them)?

Well, following are some practical, plain-English checklists citizens can use in real time at city council or board meetings to protect their First Amendment rights.  They are written so an ordinary person can actually use them while standing at the podium or immediately afterward. 

Before You Speak

Is there a public comment period?
→ If yes, it is at least a limited public forum.

Are other people allowed to speak?
→ If yes, the government cannot silence you based on viewpoint.

Are time limits posted or announced?
→ Time limits are legal if applied equally.

While You Are Speaking

Am I speaking on a matter of public concern?
→ Criticism of officials, policies, or spending is fully protected.

Am I following the same rules as others (time, order)?
→ If yes, you are protected even if officials dislike your message.

Am I being interrupted or cut off?
→ Ask yourself why:

• Actual disruption (shouting, refusing to yield time)?

• Or because the content is critical or uncomfortable?

If it’s the second one, that's a constitutional red flag.

Common Illegal Justifications (Red Flags)

🚩 “You’re being disrespectful”
🚩 “We don’t allow negative comments”
🚩 “You’re criticizing council members”
🚩 “You’re making people uncomfortable”
🚩 “This isn’t the place for that” (when others are allowed to speak)

None of these are valid legal reasons to stop protected speech.

If You Are Cut Off or Removed

Did others expressing a different viewpoint speak longer or more freely?
→ This suggests viewpoint discrimination.

Was the rule applied only to you?
→ Selective enforcement = unconstitutional.

Was the reason vague or emotional?
→ “Decorum” without definition is a legal weakness.

What to Say (Calm, On-the-Record)

If interrupted, you may calmly say:

“For the record, I am speaking on a matter of public concern and complying with all posted rules.”

Or:

“Please state the specific rule I am violating.”

These statements create a record without escalating conflict.

After the Meeting (If There Was a Violation)

Note the date, time, and exact words used
Save video or request the meeting recording
Identify witnesses
Request meeting minutes and written policies

Ask:

• Was my speech stopped due to content or viewpoint?

• Were rules enforced equally?

If yes, this may be a First Amendment violation (that's "may" as in there are no absolutes in law)

The bottom line to all this is if praise is allowed at City Council hearings but criticism is stopped, then the First Amendment has been violated.

Make a note of it.