I don't think it was rejected for the reason you're implying here. I think that the rejection was due to who it was going to consider as having "authorized access". Where that should have been "someone with a subpoena"*, it was going to be a whole lot more broad than that.
*in cases where contact was needed for technical, rather than legal, reasons, then registrars could forward the contact request to the domain name owner and let them handle it as they see fit.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
