DENVER, COLORADO- We heard on Friday that US judge William Martinez needed more time to craft an opinion on a temporary injunction of DIA's enforcement of their free speech permit. He commited to a decision early this week, and frankly we don't know what to expect. From challenges he posed to attorneys at Wednesday's hearing, the judge appears to think DIA needs some degree of "notice" about potential disruptions. He is unlikely to rule against the permit altogether because he opened the hearing already proclaiming that DIA is a "not a public forum" and thus has discretion about what expression to allow. DIA can limit subject matter, but not viewpoint, and can constrict assemblies. Judge Martinez's starting point was based on US Supreme Court precedent set at JFK and Dulles airports, ignoring that both of those facilities are decentralized and lack DIA's literal public square. Ironically, neither JFK or Dulles attempted to quash their Muslim Ban protests as did DIA. I'd like to mention some other details revealed at the preliminary injunction hearing. For starters, the person in charge of approving permits has a highy subjective attitude about viewpoint. To him, pro-military messages are not oints of view at all, they're just patriotic. They don't require permits. Also, his department hasn't declined to issue permits. They work with applicants to arrive at accommodations suitable to the airport. For example, the American Islamic Society was recently granted a permit, the airport requires they limit their participant numbers to FOUR. DPD Commander Tony Lopez explained why he needs advance notice of protest actions, to be able to schedule officers without having to pay short-notice overtime. Lopez revealed that his optimal staffing numbers are a one to one ratio with activists. Small wonder he was demoted to DIA from downtown District Six. Lopez also testified that he often threatens to make arrests "as a ploy" to make a crowd disperse. And "it usually works" he said. A next step is to mobilize his officers to appear to be targeting particular activists, to increase the intimidation, without an actual intention of making arrests, or justifying them. His testimony confirmed what I described to the court, of officers often threatening to arrest us, even when they had no legal basis, and telling us we needed a permit when none was required. From the attitude of the city attorneys and the DIA personnel, one became uneasily aware that administrators don't even blink at sacrificing civil liberties for the interests of security. If airport surveillance can't size you up as either a traveller or meetor-greetor, they can't predict your behavior and you've suddenly become a security risk. Airport customs and TSA lines are already areas inhospitable to personal freedoms. Apparently airport managers would like all their hallways and public centers to be as restricted. If cops had their way, public streets and sidewalks would be single-purpose conduits as well. We await a federal judge's ruling for now, with optimism in judgement superior to that of petty administrators, city lawyers and
Tag: Denver International Airport
Pro-immigrant activists with Occupy Denver file suit against DIA and DPD, challenge airport free speech “permit”
DENVER, COLORADO- Civil liberties champion David Lane has filed a complaint in US district court challenging Denver's office of the city attorney for instituting a permit process at DIA to prevent public protest. Holding signs has become impermissible at the airport, without the issuance of a permit seven days in advnace, although police are not bothering themselves about signs welcoming homecomers or seeking to connect business visitors with their limo service. That selective enforcement is unconstitutional of course, and the lawfirm powerhouse of Kilmer Lane & Newman is filing suit on behalf of two Occupy Denver plaintiffs. last Sunday, January 29, both were threatened with arrest by DIA police. While two earlier attempts to assemble had capitulated to DPD intimidation, the Occupy Denver activists stood their ground. Why did you file your lawsuit? "We know our rights. We want the POLICE to know our rights." 1. Full text of complaint: Case 1:17-cv-00332 Document 1 Filed 02/06/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 14 Civil Action No. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO NAZLI MCDONNELL, ERIC VERLO, Plaintiffs, vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER,? DENVER POLICE COMMANDER ANTONIO LOPEZ, in his individual and official capacity, DENVER POLICE SERGEANT VIRGINIA QUINONES, in her individual and official capacity, Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________ COMPLAINT ______________________________________________________________________________ Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys David A. Lane and Andy McNulty of KILLMER, LANE & NEWMAN, LLP, allege as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. Plaintiffs Eric Verlo and Nazli McDonnell challenge a regulation of alarming breadth that bans all First Amendment expression at Denver International Airport without a permit. 2. Plaintiffs are concerned citizens who believe that President Donald Trump has overstepped his executive authority by signing the January 27, 2017, Executive Order (hereinafter “Muslim Ban”), which permanently bans Syrian refugees from emigrating to the United States, temporarily bans nationals of seven countries (including permanent legal residents and visa-holders), and suspends all applications to the United States refugee program (even as to vetted entrants currently in transit). 3. Plaintiffs wish to express their disgust with President Trump’s (likely unconstitutional) Muslim Ban. They wish to do so in the same place that hundreds of thousands of Americans across the country have done: standing directly outside of the secure Customs and Border Protection (hereinafter “CBP”) screening area within an airport where immigrants to America enter into the main terminal after clearing customs. Plaintiffs, unlike many citizens across this great nation who have exercised their opposition to the Muslim Ban in airports by chanting, singing, dancing, and praying, simply wish to stand in silent protest, holding signs that express their solidarity with immigrants and the Muslim community. 4. Plaintiffs are banned from doing so by DENVER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT REGULATION 50 (hereinafter “Regulation 50”). 5. Regulation 50 states: “No person or organization shall leaflet, conduct surveys, display signs, gather signatures, solicit funds, or engage in other speech related activity at Denver International Airport for religious, charitable, or political purposes, or in connection with a labor dispute, except pursuant to, and in compliance with, a permit
How I nearly got arrested for holding a sign at Denver International Airport
DIA, COLORADO- Last weekend I joined thousands across the country protesting Trump's executive order restricting entry visas from seven predominantly Muslim countries. Spontaneous demonstrations had erupted at international airports nationwide on Saturday January 27. Denver's airport was no exception but the lively gathering of sign holders was ultimately persuaded by police to leave the premises. Supposedly a permit was required to hold signs. Demonstrators the next day were quickly ushered outside, to rally instead between the terminal and adjacent lightrail station, where only a tiny fraction of travelers would see them. This much we knew as we monitored events online while we reconnoitered DIA from the short-term parking garage. We made our way swiftly to the International Arrivals doors at the north end of the main terminal WITH OUR SIGNS. International Arrivals The point was to reach immigrants, right? We walked to our intended protest spot unhindered and inconspicuous, because of course signs are not an unusual sight at an airport. Travelers who've been a long time away, in particular soldiers returning from deployment, are frequently greeted by family members holding signs. Often limo drivers have to page their corporate clients. We carried our placards with their message facing inward hoping they'd be mistaken for everyday signs. When we raised them above our heads we attracted immediate attention. They read "#NO MUSLIM BAN #NO REGISTRY, END WHITE PATRIARCHY" and "FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE MUSLIMS AND WE SAID: NOT TODAY MOTHERFUCKER." Immediately a man with a "DIA Operations" cap informed us that we weren't allowed to hold signs. We assured him the opposite was true. He called for backup. We weren't alone in front of International Arrivals. In addition to the families awaiting loved ones, there were a couple dozen law firm employees holding signs which read "Pro Bono Immigration Legal Services". We surmised that their presence might have already been negotiated with DIA. Soon a couple of those lawyers approached us to announce loudly that the public protest was outside the building and that we could continue there unmolested. We thanked them for their assistance but urged that they also clarify publicly that we were within our rights to stay inside as well. I was upset that their gravitas, as lawyers, was seen as supportive of the authorities telling us to stop. Police officers arrived in short order, a first one filming us with a digital point-and-shoot, then a second filming with a cell phone, both surely streaming to a command center. After six officers assembled, a sergeant approached us flanked by two DIA employees. She gave us our formal warnings. We were given instructions to "cease and desist" while we countered that we knew our rights. After a second warning we were assured that a third would mean our immediate arrest. We held our signs higher, all the while asserting their order was unlawful. The immigration lawyers huddled as far away from us as they could. Sgt. Virginia Quinones then got on her phone to consult somebody. I
Demonic DIA mustang Blucifer may be Bronco Blue, but eyes are Herring Red
The conspiracy theories deepen about cruel oddities at Denver International Airport, and much of the conjecture is now being scuttled with classic disinformation. Questions are substantive enough about DIA construction anomalies, without worrying about Blucifer the red-eyed stallion, his Egyptian pal Anubis, gargoyle luggage gods, prophetic end-times murals, inward-facing concertina wire, tent canvas of pure Kevlar, and the dastardly Freemasons behind it all. It's supposed. Conspiracy freaks delight in pretending the Masonic Order cannot help but leave triumphant clues about its omniscience. The eyeball pyramid on US paper currency would seem demonstration enough, but conspiracy sleuths nursed on Dan Brown eat that up. And the confusion disseminaters are pouring it on. Who am I to pooh-pooh any particulars, especially conspiracies, of themselves too often scurrilously maligned, except to suggest that the less symbolism-intensive speculation about DIA is plenty obvious, and operatic enough. The fact that excavation continues at DIA, years after the facility became operative should raise eyebrows. How much excavation is required to build runways on a near-flat landscape? Has DIA really displaced so much earth it's become a significant fraction of what was removed to carve the Panama Canal? Apparently satellite pictures reveal a growing mound to suggest the extent of cavernous facilities being dug under and around the DIA. The evocative white tents were always for the nomads, on the plains, white settlers needed dugouts. Where easier to install secretive accommodations than under the everyday lock-down of a post-9/11 airport? Would DIA serve as a massive underground concentration camp? Ask yourself if a many mile buffered isolation is necessary for that, on top of being underground, or vice-versa. Area 51 remains a mystery without having to comprise buried facilities. We've already seen that Superdomes smack in the middle of urban centers make perfectly inhumane detainment centers. Imagine too, the isolation of DIA, without a railway for incoming. The Nazi camps did not predate flight. There would have been no Auschwitz without a railroad line. A far more obvious application would be as a shelter from the public outside, behind miles of no-man's land, the single entrance easily closed off. Far from even prying eyes. Underground shelters have historically been carved in bedrock, NORAD in Cheyenne Mountain as an example. Could a man-made hole ever surpass a mountain range for protection? But perhaps the New World Order has the atomic threat sewn up. The mushroom cloud may still be evoked to frighten the masses, but I'll bet that all the nuclear arms across the globe are as secure as Israel's Security Council veto. This DIA shelter may need only protect against biological agents or fallout from an environmental cataclysm. Old-fashioned bomb shelters have suffered obsolescence due to ease-of-access. What safe-room will save you if you cannot get to it? NORAD only protected those already inside it. What do you do to protect far-flung clients in the age of Twitter-speed atmospheric percussions? An oversized airport like DIA certainly answers that requirement. While Coloradans might grouse about the interminable drive to DIA, they might