Since legislation such as the RICO act, there's always been a grey area where privacy is concerned. I'm invoking the constitution, prior to the government's manipulation of its loopholes to apprehend criminals. The document written by the founding fathers. Invoking this document, it's my interpretation that the relatives of criminals should be entitled to private lives if they've never been proven to be complicit in any crimes. That's all I've ever said. RICO act, The Patriot Act, have changed how we interpret the constitution. To many, rights to privacy doesn't mean much anymore. I'm just invoking the constitution to form my argument. That's all.
How do you she/they weren't complicit in any crimes? The woman was married to a public figure. And I struggle to see how her name being listed in a document impacts on her privacy. If one is inclined to find out what a mobster's wife is called all they have to do is perform a basic Google search or look up their name in a phonebook.
You're adding 1 and 1 and getting 3.
