New Jersey enacted a data privacy law with a narrow but important scope: it applies specifically to current and retired police officers, prosecutors, judges, and their family members. The law requires data brokers to remove their personal information within 10 days of receiving a takedown request.
The rationale is straightforward. Law enforcement officers and judges face unique safety risks when their home addresses, phone numbers, and family members' information are publicly available online. Officers who arrest violent criminals, judges who sentence gang members, and prosecutors who put dangerous people behind bars need the ability to keep their personal information out of public databases.
The law was supposed to protect them. Instead, it exposed just how far data brokers will go to resist deletion.
When New Jersey law enforcement officers began submitting deletion requests under the law, 118 data brokers simply refused to comply. They ignored the 10-day deadline. They continued displaying officers' home addresses and family information on their websites. They treated a legal mandate as a suggestion.
The officers sued. The lawsuits revealed the scale of non-compliance across the data brokerage industry. Companies that claim to respect consumer privacy and comply with applicable law were actively ignoring a law specifically designed to protect people whose lives depend on data privacy.
Among the 118 non-compliant brokers, one case stands out. LexisNexis — one of the largest data brokers in the world, a company that handles background checks, insurance risk scoring, and law enforcement analytics — is accused of going beyond mere non-compliance.
According to the lawsuit, LexisNexis retaliated against more than 18,000 people associated with New Jersey law enforcement. The alleged retaliation took two forms: freezing credit reports and falsely reporting individuals as identity theft victims.
Consider what that means. Officers who asked a data broker to delete their personal information — as required by law — allegedly had their credit frozen and were falsely flagged in identity theft databases. The very act of trying to protect their privacy resulted in damage to their financial standing.
The chilling effect: If a data broker can retaliate against police officers — people with legal authority and institutional support — imagine what they can do to ordinary consumers who have neither. This case demonstrates that data brokers view consumer privacy rights not as obligations to be honored but as threats to be resisted.
You do not have to be a police officer to see the implications of this case.
First, it proves that data brokers resist deletion even when legally required. If 118 brokers ignored a law protecting police officers, how many ignore CCPA requests from ordinary consumers? The answer is unknowable, because ordinary consumers do not have the legal resources to track non-compliance the way organized law enforcement agencies do.
Second, it demonstrates the value data brokers place on your information. LexisNexis allegedly chose retaliation over compliance because the data is more valuable to them than the cost of the lawsuit. Your personal information generates revenue every time it is accessed, searched, or sold. Deleting it is destroying their product.
Third, it shows why enforcement matters. A law without enforcement is a suggestion. New Jersey's law lets affected individuals sue for $1,000 in statutory damages per violation plus punitive damages and attorneys' fees, but 118 brokers still refused to comply. The CCPA has civil penalties, but many brokers gamble that consumers will not pursue enforcement. This is why automated, continuous, legally cited deletion demands — submitted repeatedly until compliance is verified — are more effective than one-time requests.
LexisNexis is not the only data broker that makes deletion difficult. The pattern across the industry is consistent: make data collection automatic and invisible, make data deletion manual and difficult.
Some brokers require phone verification. Others demand notarized authorization. Some require physical mail with copies of government-issued identification. Others deliberately misclassify deletion requests as data portability requests — packaging your data for transfer rather than destroying it. Still others simply ignore requests and wait for the consumer to give up.
This friction is not accidental. It is a business strategy. Every consumer who gives up on the opt-out process is a consumer whose data continues generating revenue. The data brokerage industry profits from the gap between your legal rights and your practical ability to exercise them.
LexisNexis is not just any data broker. They operate one of the largest consumer reporting databases in the country. Their data influences insurance premiums through their CLUE (Comprehensive Loss Underwriting Exchange) database, employment decisions through background screening, tenant screening for rental applications, and law enforcement investigations through their analytics platforms.
If LexisNexis has inaccurate information about you — and given the scale of their data collection, the probability of errors is significant — those errors can affect your insurance rates, your job applications, your rental applications, and even your interactions with law enforcement.
Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, you have the right to request a free copy of your LexisNexis file at consumer.risk.lexisnexis.com. Reviewing this file is one of the most important privacy steps you can take, because it reveals not just what LexisNexis knows about you, but what they are telling insurance companies, employers, and landlords about you.
Request your LexisNexis consumer disclosure report. Review it for errors and dispute any inaccuracies. Submit a CCPA deletion demand for any data you want removed. And understand that a single request may not be enough — continuous monitoring and re-submission is necessary because LexisNexis, like all data brokers, continuously re-collects information.
If a company as large and sophisticated as LexisNexis allegedly retaliated against 18,000 law enforcement officers rather than comply with deletion requests, the lesson is clear: exercising your privacy rights requires persistence, documentation, and willingness to follow up when brokers resist.
Whatever level of distrust you already have for data brokers, this case is a reason to have more. It's an industry that collects your data without consent, resists your attempts to delete it, and in at least one documented case, allegedly retaliated against the very people who tried to exercise their legal rights to have it removed.
Vigilant Privacy sends CCPA deletion demands every 45 days until brokers comply. We monitor responses, follow up on rejections, and document non-compliance. When a broker resists, we escalate. $9.95/month.
Start Your Free 7-Day TrialNo credit card required. Cancel anytime. We never sell your data.