Recently, crisis response organizations are adopting a networked communication structure, as a means to connect different sources of crisis information and enable a more effective crisis response. However, this change has introduced legal complications that so far remain unaddressed, for instance regarding the exchange of privacy-sensitive information aimed at rendering a coherent picture of the crisis. This paper examines how information managers interpret legislation during crises. We analyze our results by drawing on Radbruch's tripartite taxonomy, showing that information managers oscillate between the values of certainty of law and purposiveness in regards to legislation, while the value of justice remains remarkably absent in their interpretation. By introducing a legal perspective on crisis information management we provide an important contribution to the crisis coordination debate.