jimpeel
Member
Reproduced here as forwarded to me.
This item was forwarded to you from lee mcgee on the American Civil Liberties Union web site with the comment:
"Isn't American great, where Jim Crow laws can be struck down by a card
carrying member of the NRA represented by a lawyer from the ACLU."
This item is also available on the web at:
http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=12450&c=86
ACLU of Louisiana Lawsuit Causes Repeal of Laws that Threatened Local
Free Speech
(Note the date. How'd we miss this?) April 21, 2003
NEW IBERIA, LA -- Reacting to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil
Liberties Union of Louisiana, city officials here have repealed a series
of laws that violated the free speech rights of individuals seeking to
protest on public property.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NEW IBERIA, LA -- Reacting to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil
Liberties Union of Louisiana, city officials here have repealed a series
of laws that violated the free speech rights of individuals seeking to
protest on public property.
The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of local resident Ernest L. McGee
after the city threatened him with arrest because he did not have a
"valid parade permit or a permit for a public assembly."
"The city's permit scheme had a chilling effect and served to restrain
free speech -- the first principle of individual liberty -- in a public
place," said Joe Cook, Executive Director of the ACLU of Louisiana.
"Facing a court date in October, officials finally came to their senses
after refusing to repeal the illegal ordinances prior to litigation."
According to the ACLU lawsuit, the controversy arose when McGee was
peaceably demonstrating alone with a sign on public land close to a
public highway on September 13, 2001.
McGee was protesting newly enacted gun sale policies at K-Mart following
the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. While he was standing on
public land, four New Iberia police officers approached McGee and
informed him that he did not have a valid parade permit or a permit for
a public assembly. The officers threatened him with arrest if he did not
stop his picketing.
The ACLU's lawsuit cited the ordinances as unconstitutional on their
face and as applied. ACLU attorneys also asserted the ordinances were
vague and/or overbroad by:Applying a parade ordinance to a single
person.Failing to give reasonable notice of the activities that require
a permit.Failing to provide guidelines to the issuing official to
determine whether an assembly permit should be issued and whether
insurance should be required.
The ACLU further contended that the $5.00 fee for a parade permit
operated as a prohibited tax on the exercise of free speech.
The lawsuit had asked the court to declare Ordinances 74.5, 74-146,
74-161 and 74-162 unconstitutional. The city repealed the ordinances in
question on April 1, 2003, with an effective date of April 20, 2003.