Civil Rights Archives - Page 7 of 7

Parody twitter account leads to police raid, with major implications for First and Fourth Amendment rights

A satiric photo of Mayor Ardis from the @NotPeoriaMayor twitter page

Using the name @peoriamayor, a Peoria, Illinois resident created a Twitter account made in the likeness of Mayor Jim Ardis. The account was intended to be a parody shared between Jon Daniel and his friends. As described in the article, Police Raid Over Tweets Leads to Lawsuit Against Peoria Mayor, the tweets, such as those in support of strippers, tequila and crack pipes, were intended to be funny and seen only by a small group of individuals. Despite this, the twitter account grew a rapid following. Once he realized the number of followers was growing, Daniel labeled it as a parody feed.

With grammatically incorrect tweets such as, “Im bout to climb the civic center and do some lines on the roof who’s in,’ Daniel’s rationalization was, who would possibly believe the mayor or anyone working for the mayor would have such difficulty with use of the English language?

At the request of the mayor and city manager, an investigation into where the tweets originated was initiated, ending in a police raid on Daniel’s home. Daniels has filed suit, claiming that city officials violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights.

Ardis explained to reporters, “There is no way for someone to know that what was being said under my name, picture and contact information was not coming from me. My identity as Mayor was stolen.”

Lead counsel for Daniels, Harvey Grossman stated, “Political parody is a great tradition in the United States – from Thomas Nast to Jon Stewart.”

If you or someone you know believe their constitutional rights have been violated, the team at Radford & Keebaugh can help. Contact us by phone at (678) 369-3609 or use our contact form.

Gwinnett College settles HIV-discrimination case brought under Americans with Disabilities Act

Gwinnett College has reached a settlement with a former student who was discriminated against due to her HIV status, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The college has also agreed with federal authorities to make changes to school policies to prevent future discrimination. According to the article, Gwinnett College, Feds Settle Over HIV-positive Student’s Discrimination Complaint, the former Gwinnett College student was told by school officials that because of her HIV status, she could no longer participate in the medical assistant program.

In his interview with the Gwinnett Daily Post, school president Michael Davis stated that he wasn’t aware the school had done anything illegal. The school’s medical assistant program requires that students participate in “live injections.” Even though precautions such as wearing gloves and glasses are mandatory during such practice, Davis stated, “My fear was that these students could get infected by their own stupidity, and that doesn’t mean anything negative.”

As part of the school’s former enrollment process, potential students were asked if they suffer from any blood related diseases such as HIV. Due to the U.S. Attorney’s investigation into its violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Gwinnett College is now required to make changes to its enrollment process, change certain policies and procedures, and increase ADA training for school employees. The school is also required to pay damages to the former student.

If you or someone you know thinks they have experienced discrimination due to a disability, the team at Radford & Keebaugh can help. Contact us by phone at (678) 369-3609 or use our contact form.

Lawsuit Challenges North Dakota Gay Marriage Ban

According to the Washington Post article, Lawsuit Challenges North Dakota Gay Marriage Ban, seven North Dakota couples have filed suit in federal court asserting that the state’s ban on same sex marriage violates the equal protection and due process guarantees of the U.S. Constitution. North Dakota is the last of 31 states to join the list of states challenging the ban on same sex marriage as unconstitutional.

In 2004, North Dakota voters approved a constitutional amendment limiting the scope of marriage to heterosexuals. Since the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision to strike down the section of the federal Defense of Marriage Act defining marriage as between a man and a woman, judges across the United States have nullified the ban on same sex marriage.

In a statement issued by the North Dakota Family Alliance, Executive Director Tom Freier stated that the alliance “will stand on the North Dakota constitution and with the 73% of the people who voted in 2004 to permanently place a definition of marriage in our constitution.”

In part, the complaint filed last week in North Dakota reads, “Same sex couples are identical to different sex couples in all characteristics relevant to marriage,” and “Without any legitimate governmental interest, North Dakota has targeted a minority of individuals for discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.” The suit also states the couples are subject to, “an irreparable denial of their constitutional rights.”

In addition to the District of Columbia, 19 states now recognize and allow same sex couples to marry.

If you or someone you know thinks they their civil rights have been violated, the team at Radford & Keebaugh can help. Contact us by phone at (678) 369-3609 or use our contact form.

Middle school students suspended over Facebook post: is this a First Amendment issue?

As a result of a Facebook post about their school’s dress code, a group of Spalding County students are facing suspension. The weekend before the last week of school, a FB post instructing classmates to break dress code through the last week of school escalated into what the principal described as “terroristic threats.” According to a recent post published by WSB-TV 2, the students facing suspension either commented on and/or shared the FB post which initially told students to wear red on Monday and by Thursday escalated to, “Everything they say we can’t wear, wear,” and, “We need the hallways packed and out of control.”

“To me it was just a bunch of 13-year-olds acting crazy,” states the father of one of the suspended students, whose only reply to the post was that she was in. “You should at least contact us first and let us know to be aware of this and that way we could’ve disciplined our own kid instead of ya’ll taking action her.”

Next, the students face a tribunal that will decide if additional disciplinary action will be taken. The First Amendment has been held to protect student speech, especially when it is off-campus speech and does not disrupt campus functions. The question is, will the school district uphold this discipline? And if so, will they violate the students’ constitutional rights?

If you or someone you know believes their 1st Amendment rights have been violated, the team at Radford & Keebaugh can help. Contact us by phone at (678) 369-3609.