The Colorado Springs Gazette was not amused. Nor was the Denverite about my testimony yesterday in US district court, seeking an injunction against the Denver International Airport's free speech permit. The city attorney tried to discredit me by forcing me to recite for the federal judge the full unabridge text of the sign I held at DIA. It was a riff on anti-Nazi cleric Martin Niemöller's oft-paraphrased parable: "First they came for the Socialists, but I said nothing, etc", this time foreshortened as a visceral response to Trump's Muslim Ban: "-and we said NOT TODAY [strong expletive]!" We argued about whether my message was "welcoming". I assured her that it was very warmly received and could not be interpreted as anything but uniquivocal solidarity. So I read it forcefully, resisting the inclination to lean into the microphone on the last word. Afterward my attorneys assured me it's a good day in their line of work when you get to say MOTHERFUCKER in court! Judge William Martinez restricted hearing testimony to the single day (Wednesday) and promised to rule on the preliminary injunction by Friday, February 17.
Tag: injunction
Occupy v. Martinez (Plaza Protest Ban) 2016 US 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Decision AFFIRMING Prelim Injunction
Yesterday I published the federal judge's order to grant the 2015 preliminary injunction against the Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse. Since that time the city motioned to dismiss, there were show cause hearings, and depositions, and an appeal to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. On April 8, 2016 the appeals court AFFIRMED the preliminary injunction. As a result this legal action is on the road to becoming a permanent injunction, to be decided at trial this April. The prospects look promising, based on how the appelate judges schooled our First Amendment adversaries. I'm reprinting their full decision below. In particular you might enjoy Judge McHugh's citing of US Supreme Court Justice Owen Roberts, writing in 1939 for the majority, in a decision to uphold public first amendment rights in Hague v. [AFL-]CIO. Robert affirmed that streets were traditional free speech areas: "Wherever the title of streets and parks may rest, they have immemorially been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions. Such use of the streets and public places has, from ancient times, been a part of the privileges, immunities, rights, and liberties of citizens. The privilege of a citizen of the United States to use the streets and parks for communication of views on national questions may be regulated in the interest of all; it is not absolute, but relative, and must be exercised in subordination to the general comfort and convenience, and in consonance with peace and good order; but it must not, in the guise of regulation, be abridged or denied." Here's the full 2016 opinion rejecting Denver's appeal of our federal injunction: Document: 01019599889 Date Filed: 04/08/2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _________________________________ ERIC VERLO; JANET MATZEN; and FULLY INFORMED JURY ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs - Appellees, v. THE HONORABLE MICHAEL MARTINEZ, in his official capacity as Chief Judge of the Second Judicial District, Defendant - Appellant, v. THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO, a municipality; ROBERT C. WHITE, in his official capacity as Denver Chief of Police, Defendants - Appellees. _______________ FILED ?United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit April 8, 2016 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court No. 15-1319 _________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado ?(D.C. No. 1:15-CV-01775-WJM-MJW) _________________________________ Stephanie Lindquist Scoville, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General for the State of Colorado, Denver, Colorado (Cynthia H. Coffman, Attorney General; Frederick R. Yarger, Solicitor General; Matthew D. Grove, Assistant Solicitor General; Ralph L. Carr, Colorado Judicial Center, Denver, Colorado, with her on the briefs) for Defendant - Appellant. David A. Lane, Killmer, Lane & Newman, LLP, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiffs - Appellees. Wendy J. Shea, Assistant City Attorney; Geoffrey C. Klingsporn, Assistant City Attorney; Evan P. Lee, Assistant City Attorney; Cristina Peña Helm,
Court forces Colorado Springs to delay trying to implement anti-Free Speech/ anti-Panhandling Ordinance
Mayor Bach and his Right Winger cohorts on the city council of Colorado Springs had their first taste of reality in their efforts to suppress all of us in our own rights to enjoy Free Speech in this city. See ACLU challenge forces delay- Colorado Springs backs off on enforcement timetable --- Also notice this recent case in Denver, Colorado where... Jones v. City of Denver, No. 96-WY-1751 (D. Colo. 1996). Four homeless individuals, along with two non-homeless individuals with an interest in the information communicated by those who beg, brought an action against the City and County of Denver, Denver Chief of Police, and two police officers challenging the constitutionality Colorado's state law making it a crime to "loiter . . . for the purpose of begging."[13] The parties reached a settlement agreement in which defendants stipulated that the law violates the Due Process Clause, and have agreed to a declaratory judgment and injunction prohibiting enforcement of the law in the City of Denver. The court approved the proposed settlement agreement and the state legislature subsequently repealed the suspect language. Give the unemployed and homeless an income and jobs or leave people alone as they try to survive, You Stupid Corporate Pigs!