9 results for 'cat:"Civil Rights" AND cat:"Government" AND cat:"First Amendment"'.
J. Boasberg grants summary judgment to the clergyman on the one remaining claim in his suit challenging limitations on demonstrations on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol. His proposed activities, protests on and around the steps on the eastern side of the Capitol building and the paved areas surrounding them, are protected speech under the First Amendment, and the proposed location and involvement of members of Congress do not render them "government speech." Furthermore, that classification would not exempt restrictions on that speech from First Amendment scrutiny. The steps, or at least the lower portion of those steps, have historically been and remain a public forum. Finally, the ban on speech on the steps is both over-inclusive, in that it includes activities that could not reasonably be considered to interfere with the security of the Capitol, and under-inclusive, in that they allow members of Congress to "invite an untold number of private individuals to join in expressive activities without undergoing any security vetting." They also provide no less-restrictive alternatives. A permanent injunction barring enforcement of these restrictions is entered.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Boasberg, Filed On: May 17, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv2314, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, government, first Amendment
J. Rodriguez denies an organization’s motion for an injunction and temporary restraining order after it sued the city of Kerrville, arguing local ordinances on “peddlers and solicitors” and “electioneering” violate the First Amendment. Despite expressing “generalized” concerns about the ordinances, the suing parties have not shown specific plans to engage in proscribed conduct and therefore lack standing for a restraining order.
Court: USDC Western District of Texas , Judge: Rodriguez, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 5:24cv403, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, government, first Amendment
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Pitman grants a preliminary injunction barring Caldwell County and its officials from closing bail hearings to the public and the press after they were sued by Texas Tribune and other news outlets, which said the county had “adopted a policy of categorically closing” all such hearings. The public and press have a “presumptive” right to access such hearings and are being harmed by the lack of access, and Caldwell County has provided “no support” for its arguments that such hearings should remain closed.
Court: USDC Western District of Texas , Judge: Pitman, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv910, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, government, first Amendment
J. Bennett grants summary judgment in favor to Baltimore in this lawsuit brought by a protestor who argues an ordinance prohibiting his use of an A-frame anti-abortion sign on public walkways violates his First Amendment rights. Baltimore permitted him to wear or hold his sign, hand out pamphlets and speak with anyone on the sidewalk. Therefore, the protestor has ample alternative means for communicating his message, and his claims fail.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Bennett, Filed On: January 19, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv2587, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, government, first Amendment
J. McShane finds in favor of Oregon State Senator Brian Boquist for his complaint alleging that the Senate leadership retaliated against his exercise of free speech rights. After stating during a June 2019 speech on the Senate floor that, if the Senate leader is going to send the police for him, “Hell’s coming to visit you personally,” Boquist was told he would have to provide 12-hour advance notice in writing when he planned to go to the capitol building. Boquist’s comments were hyperbolic and said in “a highly charged political environment.” The statements did not constitute a true threat and the imposition of the 12-hour rule infringed on his rights.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: McShane, Filed On: July 17, 2023, Case #: 6:19cv1163, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, government, first Amendment