ACLU files brief supporting Terry Jones
Christine Ferretti / The Detroit News
Dearborn— The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan has weighed in on the Terry Jones saga, filing a brief supporting the controversial pastor's right to protest this afternoon in front of a mosque.
In the eight-page brief to the 19th District Court, the ACLU argued that efforts to make Jones pay a peace bond to protest outside the Islamic Center of America constitute prior restraint of his rights to free speech and assembly.
"The ACLU vehemently disagrees with the content of Pastor Jones' speech, but we feel equally strongly that if the First Amendment is to have any meaning, it must mean that the government cannot suppress free speech because it, or anyone else, disagrees with that speech," ACLU Staff Attorney Jessie Rossman told The Detroit News today. "While we are not representing Pastor Jones, we filed this friend of court brief to help provide additional analysis with respect to the critical constitutional issues at stake here."
Staffers for Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy declined comment.
But prosecutors argued in court today that Jones' protest could compromise public safety because the Ford Road mosque is located in a heavily trafficked area near churches, a senior center and schools. Police also argued that Jones — who has burned a Quran — has had threats against his life.
The city has said Jones can move the protest to other "free speech zones" elsewhere in the city or pay a peace bond — as much as $100,000 — to cover police costs if he demonstrates at the mosque. He refused, setting up today's court battle.
The ACLU's brief argued that the government cannot suppress speech by making Jones pay a bond based on the cost of police services necessary for anticipated actions of others, calling it an "unconstitutional prior restraint of free speech." The group also cites a 1992 Supreme Court ruling that said it's unconstitutional to have a group bear the cost of police protection due to the content of their message.
Former Macomb County Prosecutor Carl Marlinga agreed the procedure being used against Jones runs contrary to Supreme Court precedent.
"There appears to be no evidence, no allegation even that Rev. Jones has made a threat against a person or has made a threat against the property of another," Marlinga said. "The Dearborn Police and Wayne County prosecutor are mixing apples and oranges."
Marlinga said regardless of the outcome of today's trial, Jones will have grounds for legal action. The city is better off if it loses in court today, because they "won't have this mistake to be looking at," Marlinga said.
"Even if you think someone will say something that will inflame a crowd, you cannot use the court process in advance to rule on whether or not a person can speak," he said. "Constitutionally, you just can't do it. You can't say if you don't put up money for a bond we're not going to let you speak."
The fact that the city's ordinance does provide "free speech zones" for people who want to speak out does put them on "stronger ground," he said, but added appellate case law makes it clear they "cannot pigeonhole someone into a free speech zone if they have a valid reason for wanting to conduct speech in a different public place."
Dearborn has tangled with the civil liberties group in the past.
The ACLU sued over a 1989 ordinance that required protesters to secure permits 30 days in advance. The state Court of Appeals sided with the ACLU in 2005.
Several portions of the ordinance have since been changed.
[email protected]
Christine Ferretti / The Detroit News
Dearborn— The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan has weighed in on the Terry Jones saga, filing a brief supporting the controversial pastor's right to protest this afternoon in front of a mosque.
In the eight-page brief to the 19th District Court, the ACLU argued that efforts to make Jones pay a peace bond to protest outside the Islamic Center of America constitute prior restraint of his rights to free speech and assembly.
"The ACLU vehemently disagrees with the content of Pastor Jones' speech, but we feel equally strongly that if the First Amendment is to have any meaning, it must mean that the government cannot suppress free speech because it, or anyone else, disagrees with that speech," ACLU Staff Attorney Jessie Rossman told The Detroit News today. "While we are not representing Pastor Jones, we filed this friend of court brief to help provide additional analysis with respect to the critical constitutional issues at stake here."
Staffers for Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy declined comment.
But prosecutors argued in court today that Jones' protest could compromise public safety because the Ford Road mosque is located in a heavily trafficked area near churches, a senior center and schools. Police also argued that Jones — who has burned a Quran — has had threats against his life.
The city has said Jones can move the protest to other "free speech zones" elsewhere in the city or pay a peace bond — as much as $100,000 — to cover police costs if he demonstrates at the mosque. He refused, setting up today's court battle.
The ACLU's brief argued that the government cannot suppress speech by making Jones pay a bond based on the cost of police services necessary for anticipated actions of others, calling it an "unconstitutional prior restraint of free speech." The group also cites a 1992 Supreme Court ruling that said it's unconstitutional to have a group bear the cost of police protection due to the content of their message.
Former Macomb County Prosecutor Carl Marlinga agreed the procedure being used against Jones runs contrary to Supreme Court precedent.
"There appears to be no evidence, no allegation even that Rev. Jones has made a threat against a person or has made a threat against the property of another," Marlinga said. "The Dearborn Police and Wayne County prosecutor are mixing apples and oranges."
Marlinga said regardless of the outcome of today's trial, Jones will have grounds for legal action. The city is better off if it loses in court today, because they "won't have this mistake to be looking at," Marlinga said.
"Even if you think someone will say something that will inflame a crowd, you cannot use the court process in advance to rule on whether or not a person can speak," he said. "Constitutionally, you just can't do it. You can't say if you don't put up money for a bond we're not going to let you speak."
The fact that the city's ordinance does provide "free speech zones" for people who want to speak out does put them on "stronger ground," he said, but added appellate case law makes it clear they "cannot pigeonhole someone into a free speech zone if they have a valid reason for wanting to conduct speech in a different public place."
Dearborn has tangled with the civil liberties group in the past.
The ACLU sued over a 1989 ordinance that required protesters to secure permits 30 days in advance. The state Court of Appeals sided with the ACLU in 2005.
Several portions of the ordinance have since been changed.
[email protected]
