[shadowgovt]

No, it is not.

In fact, the opposite right (the right to face one's accuser) is enshrined Constitutionally in the United States when we bring the force of law to bear on a citizen.

Anonymity has value in specific contexts. It is not a universal right in all contexts.

[2h]

trolling online is not a crime, so no crime, so no right to face anyone.

[shadowgovt]

Harassment can be, in fact, a crime.

If your position is "Well they should involve the courts first," we are probably reaching agreement, but we're all aware of how weak the legal system is regarding online harassment, right? Most cyber-crime falls way outside the jurisdictions that are traditionally designed to handle harassment (as harassment was traditionally a very geographically-localized crime).

I'm personally willing to let the bar for "Disclosing enough information about someone's handle that they can be found IRL" lower than "a warrant is out for their arrest."

(This does raise an interesting question: perhaps we do need some kind of new cross-jurisdictional legal organ to decide when harassment raises to the bar of "doxxing acceptable" whether or not it raises to the bar of "prosecutable." That'd be nice to have; then we could have a generally-accepted standard for when it is and is not okay).

[2h]

> If your position is "Well they should involve the courts first,"

no because no crime has been committed, unless you count the doxxing.

[shadowgovt]

Doxxing is not illegal in the US.

It may be a component of another crime, such as slander or incitement to violence.

If the individual in question believes this organization has done either of those things, they are welcome to involve the law (as the other party is doing).