On June 13, 2008 the United States District Court granted the application filed by the Law Office of Silver, Hadden, Silver, Wexler & Levine on behalf of the Los Angeles Police Protective League for a Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause re: Preliminary Injunction from implementing on June 15, 2008 the Special Order by the LAPD on financial disclosure which would require officers assigned to specialized units of the Los Angeles Police Department, as the gang and narcotics units, to complete comprehensive financial forms describing all of their personal financial information, including liabilities and all assets held in banking institutions and investment funds held by themselves or jointly with a spouse, dependent, or individuals other than a spouse or dependent.

The League sought a Temporary Restraining Order to prevent the imminent implementation of the Special Order which would violate the right of privacy of the represented League members respecting their personal financial information in violation of Article I, Section 1 of the California Constitution, and additionally violate California Government Code Section 3308 of the Public Safety Procedural Bill of Rights Act which prohibits a public safety department from requiring or requesting any public safety officer to make a financial disclosure unless such information qualifies under narrowly defined exceptions which the League contended were not satisfied in this case. This case was reported by the Los Angeles Times as follows:

Judge blocks LAPD mandate of officers' financial disclosures
The requirement aims to help supervisors screen for illicit activity and to help the department comply with a federal anti-corruption decree. Police union says it violates officers' privacy.
By Joel Rubin
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

A federal judge Friday temporarily barred the Los Angeles Police Department from enforcing a controversial policy that would require officers in specialty units to disclose personal financial information.

The temporary restraining order, granted by U.S. District Judge Gary A. Feess, had been requested by the Police Protective League -- the union representing the department's 9,300 rank-and-file officers.

The disclosures, which would cover about 600 officers working mostly in anti-gang and narcotics units, would require the officers to turn over to department officials documents on any outside income, real estate, stocks, other assets and debts every two years. They also would have to reveal the size of their bank accounts and include any holdings they share with family members or business partners. Officers already assigned to the units would be granted a two-year grace period before having to complete the records.

It has been one of the most problematic provisions of a federal consent decree for the department to implement. The decree was ordered after a lengthy investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice in the wake of a scandal in the late 1990s involving misconduct by anti-gang officers at the Rampart Division. Agreed to by the city, it mandates numerous LAPD reforms.

Members of the civilian Police Commission who approved the policy argue that the financial disclosures