The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that posting arrestees' mugshots on government websites constitutes illegal pretrial punishment.

In a unanimous decision, three judges gave Brian Houston permission to sue Maricopa County over the sheriff's department's practice of routinely posting photos of people processed in its jails on the internet. Justice Marcia Berzon, writing for the panel, rejected the agency's argument that the posts served a legitimate public purpose.

But Thursday's ruling doesn't just affect Houston's ability to sue.

He has filed lawsuits on behalf of other people who have found themselves in this situation. And now, with a formal court opinion, they too will be able to file their own claims.

There was no immediate response from the sheriff's office.

Houston was arrested by Phoenix police in January 2022 and charged with assault, according to court records. As part of the booking process, his photo was taken and posted on the county's publicly accessible website along with many other photos.

Next to his photo was a list of his full name, date of birth, and “type of crime.”

But the site also has a “details” button that reveals his gender, height, weight, hair color, eye color, and the specific charges he was arrested on.

In accordance with agency policy, the post remained online for approximately three days. Houston was never charged with charges not mentioned in the post, but the charges were later dropped.

But that's not the end of the problem.

Houston said third-party websites “scrape” such information and post it on their sites.

He specifically cited records from Mugshot.com, which shows mugshots for about 909,000 Arizonans, the majority in Maricopa County. That's what it means.

Mr Houston said all of this caused him emotional distress and public humiliation, permanently damaging his business and personal reputation.

Berzon said it's clear that government harm to people who have been arrested before they are brought to trial can violate due process rights if it is “unacceptably punitive.” said.

He said the only non-punitive reason for the county to post Houston's photo and personal information in this case is transparency. But the court was not persuaded.

“That word is not a talisman against the fear of punishment by the government,” Berzon said, calling it “a very vague concept” that would require something more to prove the government's legitimate interests. The judge said it was necessary. This is something the county has not been able to do before.

And the judges were unimpressed by the county's argument that putting this information online would help educate Maricopa County residents about how their government, and thus the legal system, operates.

If there was an actual educational element, the information wouldn't be deleted after three days, she said. And sometimes they decide to post personal information that is unrelated to the crime, such as date of birth, height, eye color, hair color, etc., Berzon said.