H.R. 347: Get the Truth on the New "Protest Law" from THE PARTNERSHIP FOR CIVIL JUSTICE FUND 8MAR12

I have seen several e mails about the death of free speech and protest rights as described in the e mail below, but waited to see how things were going to shake out. Here are the facts about HR 347 from the good people at PCJF, check it out and share and don't let anyone scare you from exercising your 1st amendment rights!

H.R. 347: Get the Truth on the New "Protest Law" A Factsheet written by the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund

From Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, Executive Director of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund H.R. 347: Get the Truth on the New “Protest Law” This past week there has been a rallying cry in defense of free speech sounding the alarm that there is brand new legislation, H.R. 347, that some have wrongly argued radically transforms the landscape for protestors in the United States. Today, President Obama signed H.R. 347 into law. Much of what has been written about H.R. 347 is not correct. We are writing this to clarify the situation and separate fact from fiction. Many of the articles and email blasts claim that the law at issue, H.R. 347, “Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011,” was written in response to, and targets, the Occupy Movement and is a new full scale assault on dissent in general. There have been alerts, articles and email campaigns urging people to take action asserting that the new bill “criminalizes protest,” is “severely curtailing First Amendment liberties,” “makes protest illegal,” is “outlawing the Occupy Movement,” and makes “free speech a felony.” There is even one campaign titled, “Say Goodbye to Your First Amendment Rights.” Sounds alarming. At the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, we have received many calls and inquiries regarding the central question: how does this law affect protestor rights? We think these facts will help: Fact: H.R. 347 does not represent a new law regulating free speech rights. Most of the language of H.R. 347 has been on the books since 2006. H.R. 347 is an amendment to an existing law, 18 USC § 1752 “restricted buildings and grounds,” that has existed in various forms since 1971. The most significant amendments to the law occurred in 2006. The law is a bad law -- but it has been a bad law for years. Much of the language that people are talking about this week already exists and has existed for years. The language about “an event designated as a special event of national significance”? Already there. The language about “engaging in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to” a restricted area? Already there. The language about “conspiracy”? Already there. Fact: The purpose of the existing law, and why it’s bad. The law as substantially amended in 2006 is very problematic and people should be rightfully concerned. What the law does (but this is not new) is it creates what is in essence a roving or movable zone of federal law enforcement jurisdiction around any person who is under Secret Service protection or in conjunction with a National Special Security Event (NSSE), as distinguished from a permanently fixed location. This allows for federal prosecution of persons who commit enumerated violations of the law within that zone and some of those violations read like classic protest activities. Among other things, the law allows the Secret Service to designate what would normally be public space as a restricted area and for there to be federal prosecution of anyone who “enters or remains” in a restricted area where a person under Secret Service protection will be visiting or which is restricted in conjunction with an NSSE; or who engages in “disorderly or disruptive conduct” with the intent and effect of “imped[ing] or disrupt[ing] the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;” or who blocks entrance to or exit from a restricted area. Certain major events are designated as NSSEs, and there are at least three on the horizon this year. They include DNC and RNC major party conventions this summer and the NATO meeting in Chicago in May. Other events that are so designated have included IMF/World Bank meetings, G-8 and G-20 meetings, the Inaugurations, and even the Super Bowl. Fact: What is new about the H.R. 347 amendments? 1. The existing law required that for a person to be prosecuted under it, they would have had to carry out those described acts both “willfully” and “knowingly.” The requirement of “willfulness” generally means that a conviction requires proof that the person knew his conduct was unlawful. H.R. 347 strikes the “willfully” requirement. The new amendments appear to intend for a person to be convicted only by “knowingly” taking the actions described even if the person does not know that the actions are unlawful. As amended, a conviction arguably only requires proof that a person “knowingly entered” a certain area. This is an effort to lower the bar for prosecutors who would, arguably, no longer have to prove that a person knew his conduct was unlawful. 2. The other major change is the inclusion of the White House and grounds and the Vice President’s residence and grounds as fixed zones of designation. You might wonder why this is even necessary. Of course, entering into the White House and its fenced-in grounds is already a federal violation. We think this particular change is to target demonstration activity, specifically that which occurs on the White House sidewalk just outside the perimeter fence (as detailed in 36 C.F.R. §7.96 it is lawful to protest on the White House sidewalk, which is under National Park Service jurisdiction). We think that the Government wishes to make it easier to prosecute protestors who step up off of the White House sidewalk and stand on the concrete ledge supporting the fence, something which tourists can be seen doing all the time. We are also concerned that the Secret Service seeks to be able to expand its jurisdiction and authority to create pop-up cordoned off restriction zones in front of the White House extending to areas where demonstrators lawfully assemble. The PCJF will be closely monitoring the use of the new amendments and the existing law and is prepared to take legal action where merited. Fact: There are no new penalties under this law. Contrary to some of what has been written in the past week, there are no new penalties in the law. The law has also already been used in the past to prosecute demonstrators. We do think that it is very likely that the Government is looking at the upcoming NSSE events which are sure to draw demonstrations and determining what is in their arsenal to arrest and prosecute persons engaged in protests. They are keenly aware of the growing social justice movement -- more than 6,700 peaceful protestors have been arrested in a sustained and coordinated attack against the Occupy movement since September 2011. This includes the 700 people falsely arrested on the Brooklyn Bridge on whose behalf the PCJF has filed a class action lawsuit seeking to vindicate their constitutional rights. Fact: What Should A Person Do Who Is Concerned About Free Speech Rights? We believe in firmly defending fundamental First Amendment rights in the courts and in the streets. Challenge this law’s effect on protest, yes. But it is critical to have accurate information in hand to wage that fight and not to assert the death of free speech rights when we are not at that moment. As with any law, we are cognizant of any adverse impact on free speech and protest and dissent. While this law, including in its already existing form, is adverse, and serious, it is essential that those of us challenging abridgments of free speech or restrictions on dissent do so from a basis that is factual and accurate. It is equally important not to spread fear and inaccurate information that has the effect of chilling participation in collective action and demonstrations. So here’s what else you can do: stay vigilant about our civil rights and civil liberties and be prepared to take action to defend them; sign up for news and analysis you can trust from the PCJF, and most importantly, keep going out to the streets!

Civil Rights Legal Groups Demand Records on Federal Law Enforcement Involvement in Coordinated Crackdown on Occupy Movement 16NOV11

THE American government has voiced support for many occupations and demonstrations around the world this year, especially the Arab Spring revolutions (when they haven't threatened the profit margins of American corporations and the U.S. military-industrial complex, as in Bahrain). But here, in the U.S.A., the Occupy Wall Street movement is under attack by local, state and federal government agencies. It would seem freedom, civil liberties and human rights don't apply here when actual practice of these rights are a threat to the profits of the American financial cabal and corporate America. The PCJF and the NLG is fighting back to expose our governments abuse of our freedoms and civil liberties.....

The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund and the National Lawyers Guild Mass Defense Committee filed Freedom of Information Act requests with various federal law enforcement agencies today. Below is the press release issued about the filings. We encourage you to read and circulate the press release among friends and supporters. SPREAD THE WORD
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE	November 16, 2001
Civil Rights Legal Groups Demand Records on Federal Law Enforcement Involvement in Coordinated Crackdown on Occupy Movement PCJF and NLG Mass Defense Committee File Multi-Agency Requests
The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) and the National Lawyers Guild Mass Defense Committee filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests today with the Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the National Park Service (NPS) requesting that the agencies release information that they possess related to the involvement of federal agencies in the planning of a coordinated law enforcement crackdown that has taken places in multiple cities against the Occupy Movement in recent days and weeks. The FOIA to the various federal law enforcement agencies states: “This request specifically encompasses disclosure of any documents or information pertaining to federal coordination of, or advice or consultation regarding, the police response to the Occupy movement, protests or encampments.” The Occupy Movement has been confronted by a nearly simultaneous effort by local governments and local police agencies to evict and break up encampments in cities and towns throughout the country. It is now known that mayors and other local officials have met together on conference calls in recent weeks and developed a coordinated strategy to dislodge and break up the encampments using common talking points including a public pretextual rationale to justify police action. Mara Veheyden-Hilliard, Executive Director of the Partnership for Civil Justice and the co-chair of the National Lawyers Guild’s National Mass Defense Committee, states: “The severe crackdown on the occupation movement appears to be part of a national strategy to crush the movement. This multi-jurisdictional coordination shows that the crackdown is supremely political." “The FOIA requests seek critical information regarding the role of federal law enforcement agencies,” Verheyden-Hilliard explained. “The Occupy demonstrations are not criminal activities, and police should not be treating them as such. This protest movement for social and economic justice has captured the imagination of the country. The coordinated effort of law enforcement to suppress it is a reflection of its political challenge to the status-quo.” “We see the scapegoating of these movements, the attacks at night, and in general tactics designed to terrorize and to scare protesters away," stated Heidi Boghosian, Executive Director of the National Lawyers Guild. "This request is critical to the transparency that is required in order for the people of the United States to be informed as to the U.S. government's action in regard to free speech activities." Read the Freedom of Information Act request here. ### The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) is a not-for-profit constitutional rights legal and educational organization which, among other things, seeks to ensure constitutional accountability within police practices and government transparency in operations. It is counsel on the Barham and Becker class action cases in which more than 1,000 persons were falsely arrested during protests in Washington, D.C., resulting in settlements totaling $22 million and major changes in police practices. The PCJF previously brought the successful litigation in New York challenging the 2004 ban on protests in the Great Lawn of Central Park. It is counsel with the National Lawyers Guild in Oakland, CA challenging police mass arrest tactics. It won a unanimous ruling at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals finding the MPD’s unprecedented military-style police checkpoint program unconstitutional. The PCJF previously uncovered and disclosed that the D.C. police employed an unlawful domestic spying and agent provocateur program in which officers were sent on long-term assignments posing as political activists and infiltrated lawful and peaceful groups. For more information go to: www.JusticeOnline.org. The National Lawyers Guild was formed as the nation's first racially integrated voluntary bar association, with a mandate to advocate for fundamental principles of human and civil rights including the protection of rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution. The Guild has championed the First Amendment right to engage in vigorous political speech for 75 years. The Guild has a long history of defending individuals accused by the government of espousing "dangerous" ideas, including in hearings conducted by the House Committee on Un-American Activities and other examples of governmental overreaching now popularly discredited. See e.g. Kinoy v. District of Columbia, 400 F.2d 761 (1968). Since then, it has continued to represent thousands of Americans critical of government policies, from civil rights advocates and anti-war activists during the Vietnam era to current anti-globalization, peace, environmental and animal rights activists. Its Mass Defense Committee is a coordinated body of hundreds of lawyers, legal workers and law students who are defending the free speech rights of the Occupy actions around the country.

Class Action Lawsuit Filed in Brooklyn Bridge Mass Arrest 5OKT11

SHARE with anyone who may have been arrested during this protest on the Brooklyn Bridge on Saturday, 1OKT11.

		JusticeOnline.org Subscribe Class Action Lawsuit Filed in Brooklyn Bridge Mass Arrest Partnership for Civil Justice Fund Files Federal Constitutional Rights Class Action Dear Craig, Photo: Sophia Marsh Attorneys from the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) on Oct. 4 filed a class action lawsuit against Mayor Bloomberg, Police Commissioner Kelly and the City of New York, charging mass violations of constitutional rights in the trap and detain mass arrest of 700 demonstrators on the Brooklyn Bridge this past Saturday, October 1, 2011. The lawsuit charges that "the NYPD engaged in a premeditated, planned, scripted, and calculated effort to sweep the streets of protestors and disrupt a growing protest movement in New York." The class action lawsuit, Garcia v. Bloomberg, was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Case No: 11 CIV 6957. For more information on the lawsuit and the PCJF's work in defense of free speech rights, go to www.JusticeOnline.org. "Police commanders led and escorted demonstrators onto the roadway of the Brooklyn Bridge in an intentional entrapment," stated Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, Executive Director of the PCJF and counsel on the litigation. "The police conducted a charade - and duly videotaped it - of speaking inaudibly into a bullhorn that could not be heard mere feet away from the officer. The NYPD knew no audible communication was given. The NYPD also knew that the Constitution requires that any ostensible command must be heard by those who are expected to be bound by it. Instead, the NYPD engaged in a performance, videotaped it, and sprang their trap. They then set their PR machine into motion, widely distributing their edited videos of events to spin a false narrative to the public and the media," she continued. "This lawsuit is brought on behalf of all New Yorkers," stated Carl Messineo, Legal Director of the PCJF and counsel on the suit. "People from all walks of life came down to the Wall Street area on Saturday to participate in a peaceful demonstration and many others joined the spirited march along the way. They had no intention of being arrested nor could they have had knowledge that the NYPD was preparing to entrap hundreds of them on the Brooklyn Bridge in an effort to stifle dissent." "This lawsuit is being filed now to send a clear message to the NYPD that this movement had the right to march on October 1 and has the right to march on any day without fear," continued Carl Messineo. "People have the right to speak out against Wall Street greed and growing poverty without fear that the NYPD would seek to illegally arrest them and suppress their mass assembly protest." To read the complaint, click here. Read the media coverage of the Brooklyn Bridge mass arrest class action lawsuit: Huffington Post: Occupy Wall Street Mass Arrest Resembles Infamous, Costly Police Tactic, Critics Say New York Times: Citing Police Trap, Protesters File Suit Gawker: Lawsuit Filed Over Brooklyn Bridge Mass Arrest We can't do this work without your help. The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) is a not-for-profit legal and educational organization that defends the civil rights and civil liberties of grassroots movements seeking social and economic justice. The PCJF represents the 99 percent who need justice. Please make a generous donation. Spread the word
		If you were forwarded this email, click here to receive important Action Alerts from the PCJF. Click to view this message as HTML in your browser. Click to forward this message.

Help Fight the Government's Massive Spying Campaign Join the Expose and Expunge Movement 20DEZ10

AS a person who has had a FBI file since I was in the 9th grade (started during the Nixon years), and having proof of continued government surveillance of my activities (my brother who was in the USAF was denied a promotion and transfer to a missile silo because I was involved in anti-war protest (covert war in Central America) and involved with a No Nuke organization (Union of Concerned Scientist, just doing office drudge volunteer work for them), I know what it is like to have the government watch and listen in on my life....and though I have joked about it with my friends I do resent it. I am an American, a Christian and a left wing Socialist. I participate in non-violent civil disobedience , have been arrested at some of these protest, and am not afraid to speak out against threats to the Republic, threats to our civil and human rights. I resent the increasing erosion of the freedoms that I learned about in school, the freedoms so many in the military as well as in civil actions died for, resent the propaganda campaign of fear used against us to justify the attacks on the freedoms that have made our nation great. I hope you will sign on to this action by the Partnership For Civil Justice in defense of our freedom, our civil rights, our Constitution, our Republic! DON'T BE AFRAID, SIGN THE LETTER TODAY!

JusticeOnline.org Subscribe Help Fight the Government's Massive Spying Campaign Join the Expose and Expunge Movement Spread the word The Washington Post today has given extensive coverage to the U.S. government's massive and growing operation of domestic spying on the American people – a threat that the PCJF has been at the forefront of exposing and fighting. Please join the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund and thousands of others and sign the letter that states, "The people's rights protected under the Constitution are fundamentally diminished unless these illegal operations are halted." (Click here to read the letter.) The PCJF is also undertaking a People's Investigation and Audit using FOIA, public records demands and other legal means to compel disclosure and expungement. "We will not stand by and allow the Constitution to become a mere ornament affixed to a police state," emphasized Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, co-founder of the PCJF. As today's article states, "The Post findings paint a picture of a country at a crossroads..." where enshrined constitutional protections against government intrusion and surveillance into our lives are being dismantled in practice by a monster intelligence complex that uses national security as its pretext. The article details how, "Technologies and techniques honed for use on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan have migrated into the hands of law enforcement agencies in America." "The occupied people of Iraq have become the guinea pigs, and their land the testing ground, for the implementation of a new surveillance state in the United States," stated Mara Verheyden-Hilliard. The Post's report, "Monitoring America," includes that: The FBI's Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative contains 161,948 files on people who have not been accused of any crime, but simply were targeted for reporting by local or federal authorities, or even just a neighbor or stranger. The files include employment history, financial documents, photos and more.   The Department of Homeland Security's massive fusion center program -- which feeds into the FBI's Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative -- is so out of control that they can't account for the $31 billion in tax-payer funds they have handed out to state and local law enforcement.   There are no professional standards or qualifications for the "expertise" that is hired for training and advising law enforcement, and as such right wing and racist anti-Muslim so-called "experts" have been paid to advise and influence operations. A broad and diverse cross-section of leaders, human rights advocates, attorneys and legal scholars have come together to take a stand against these continuing violations. Please join them and add your name to the Sign-On Letter for the Expose and Expunge Campaign that demands that the government disclose and purge the data collected through its domestic spying and surveillance programs. Take Action Read and Sign the letter here. See the initial list of signers. If you have signed the letter, get five friends and family members to do so by clicking here. Make an urgently needed tax-deductible end of year contribution to support this critical campaign. Initial list of signers Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General Noam Chomsky Geronimo ji Jaga, former political prisoner held for 27 years Cindy Sheehan Cynthia McKinney Michel Shehadeh, LA8 defendant; Committee for Justice Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, co-founder Partnership for Civil Justice Fund Carl Messineo, co-founder Partnership for Civil Justice Fund Jennifer Harbury, Human Rights Lawyer Michael Ratner, President, Center for Constitutional Rights* Ron Kovic, author, Born on the 4th of July Kathy Kelly, co-coordinator, Voices for Creative Nonviolence Blase and Theresa Bonpane, Office of the Americas John Passacantando, former Executive Director, Greenpeace USA Heidi Boghosian, Executive Director, National Lawyers Guild Mahdi Bray, Executive Director, Muslim American Society Freedom Michael Berg, father of Nicholas Berg, killed in Iraq Brian Becker, National Coordinator, ANSWER Coalition Mounzer Sleiman, Vice Chair, National Council of Arab Americans Michael Prysner, co-founder, March Forward! Michael Avery, former President, National Lawyers Guild, professor Suffolk Law School Michael Steven Smith, Board of Directors, Center for Constitutional Rights* Carol Sobel, Civil Rights Attorney James Lafferty, Exec. Director, National Lawyers Guild Los Angeles Eric Mar, Board of Supervisors, City & County of San Francisco Shakeel Syed, the Executive Director of the Shura Council of Southern California* Marina Drummer, Angola 3 Defense Committee Frank Dorrel, Publisher, Addicted to War Mike Ferner, President, Veterans for Peace * Organization listed for identification purposes only. Sign-On Letter for the Expose & Expunge CampaignDisclose and purge data collected through illegal domestic spying and surveillance programs We the undersigned call on the Obama Administration and Congress to immediately begin identifying and expunging from all government databases the massive accumulation of information collected by the Bush administration’s illegal domestic spying operations on millions of people who broke no law. Some of these illegal spying programs were suspended and yet the government maintains the illegally collected data. These databases should be expunged. We also oppose the continuation of other programs initiated during the Bush era which continue on in wholesale data collection and mass surveillance, unchecked and unabated. For instance, federal agents, local law enforcement and U.S. military personnel, with input from private right-wing political groups, continue to collect and report surveillance data, including fabricated disinformation, to the 72 government Fusion Centers around the United States. Fusion Centers have been found to target political, student, and religious organizations and activities. The people of the United States have a legal right to be free from government surveillance, the type of which was initiated by the Bush administration on an enormous scale. Using the Sept. 11 attacks as a pretext, the Bush White House permitted the FBI, the National Security Agency, the CIA, Pentagon and other law-enforcement and military agencies to conduct unprecedented data collection against the people. Thousands have been targeted because of their political beliefs and activities, their religious beliefs, their race and ethnicity, or because they inadvertently fell into one of the many broad categories to justify and execute the sweeping data collection programs. This is the modern-day variant of the discredited witch-hunts of the 1950s. We call on the Obama Administration and Congress to order a complete audit of law-enforcement and military data and record-keeping systems and to disclose to the public the scope and parameters of data-collection on people and organizations in the United States. The people’s rights protected under the Constitution are fundamentally diminished unless these illegal operations are halted and the rights of all people are restored by the identification of data collection programs, and the expunging of those databases. I was arrested during the protest in the case below, still remember that fat pig Ramsey laughing while at the barricades about how they trapped all of us.....well, the joke is on the District now..... Becker, et al.      v. District of Columbia, et al.* U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Case No. 01-CV-811 (Class Action)   Mass Arrest of 600+ Lawful Protestors; Raid and Seizure of Activists' Meeting Hall; Confiscation of Political Literature; Brutal Beatings of Peaceful Activists The Partnership for Civil Justice has advanced a class action complaint against the Government for violations of protestors' rights at the April, 2000 Spring joint meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. This lawsuit challenges the disruption efforts of law enforcement against constitutionally protected First Amendment activities and mass political protest, and the unconstitutional trap and arrest tactics of law enforcement in the District of Columbia against mass assembly. The class portion of the Complaint was filed on behalf of nearly 700 protesters, journalists, tourists and bystanders who were trapped on all sides by police and then falsely arrested in an unconstitutional sweep of the streets during a demonstration against the Prison-Industrial Complex on Saturday April 15, 2000. The arrests were made in advance of days of anticipated protests, and were calculated to disrupt First Amendment protected activity. Many arrestees were put in preventive detention overnight, hogtied ankle to wrist, in harsh conditions as described in further detail in the Complaint. Other claims in this litigation relate to the unconstitutional raid and closure of activists’ meeting hall (the Convergence Center), as well as brutal beatings. The plaintiffs and the District of Columbia have reached a settlement of the case. Click here for the Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval. Click here for the Court's Order granting Preliminary Approval. * This case has been previously captioned as both Alliance v. District of Columbia and Fifty Years Is Enough v. District of Columbia.   AP: DC agrees to pay $13M over arrests of protesters Monday, November 23, 2009 Reprint Legal Times: City to Settle Mass Arrest Class Action for $13.7 Million Monday, November 23, 2009 Reprint Calling the Police Version of Events "Fanciful," Magistrate Judge Recommends the Court Find Mass Arrests Were False Thursday, February 28, 2008 U.S. District Court Magistrate Judge John M. Facciola has issued a report and recommendation to presiding Judge Paul L. Friedman that summary judgment issue in favor of the Becker class declaring the mass arrest to be a mass false arrest. Magistrate Judge Facciola also recommended that Judge Friedman reject in entirety the District of Columbia's motion to dismiss the claims of all plaintiffs, including those who were beaten by police or suffered injuries when the MPD raided protestors' Convergence Center.l Multimedia Re-Creation of April 15, 2000 Sidewalk March Tuesday, September 11, 2007 The MPD persists in representing to the Court that the April 15, 2000 march that was ultimately subject to false mass arrest by the MPD was a riot. Rather than accepting these false claims at false value, the Partnership for Civil Justice has undertaken a massive review and compilation of the multi-media footage of the march. Bringing together the critical moments, selecting from scores of hours of police channel communications, command center dispatch announcements, reports from the overhead helicopter, MPD and civilian video, the PCJF has re-created the peaceful, law-abiding and, indeed, police escorted march from the moment it steps off (with police permission) to the moment when without warning the MPD uses a trap-and-arrest tactic to surround everyone including protestors, by-standers, journalists, tourists and legal observers. Please visit www.BeckerSettlement.com.

U.S. Federal Judge Lauds “Historic” Settlement Court Approval Given for Protest Arrest Class Action Resolution

FINALLY, VICTORY!!!! I have been arrested during nonviolent protest four times in the metro D.C. area and have experienced and seen how the D.C, police have violated people's civil rights. This is a huge victory for civil rights protections for everyone!!!!! WELL DONE AND THANK YOU PARTNERSHIP FOR CIVIL JUSTICE!!!! See the Washington Post article after this announcement from the PCJF. Click the header for the final court transcripts, the judge does some interesting reminiscing about his early years in law and the mass arrest made during the May Day anti Vietnam war protest.....
 
Transcript Now Available in Becker, et al. v. District of Columbia, et al.
 

Spread  the word

Issuing final approval to a class action settlement, U.S. Federal Judge Paul Friedman described the terms of settlement of a nearly decade-long protest arrest lawsuit in Washington, D.C., as “historic” and an achievement for “future generations.”

From the bench, the Judge stated, “The equitable relief has effectively changed the landscape, both practically on the streets and legally, in the courts of the District of Columbia and under law as pertains to police conduct during mass demonstrations.”

The class action lawsuit filed by attorneys from the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund on behalf of nearly 700 demonstrators and passersby who were illegally mass arrested on April 15, 2000 in downtown Washington, D.C., led to major reform legislation adopted by the D.C. City Council in 2004 and additional changes in police practices and policies won by the PCJF.

During the litigation, the PCJF successfully fought to end the D.C. police’s “trap and detain” arrest tactic whereby the police would use police lines to suddenly surround and arrest entire groups of people in proximity to free speech activities. The monetary terms of the nearly $14 million settlement include up to $18,000 for each eligible class member. It is considered to be the largest protest settlement in U.S. history.

During the fairness hearing held in open court in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Judge Friedman discussed the case, the settlement and the resulting changes in police practices in Washington, D.C., as well as the efforts of class counsel at the PCJF, whom he said had “done a spectacular job.”

"[I]t's an important settlement, it's an historic settlement,” stated Judge Friedman. “[T]he terms of this settlement are historic. They provide substantial relief for the plaintiffs and for future generations of protestors.” He added, “There are fewer more tenacious lawyers who work as hard for their clients.”

Judge Friedman discussed the First Amendment Rights and Police Standards Act of 2004, stating: “Along the way [of this litigation] the city council, again at the urging of plaintiffs' counsel in this case, passed really quite historic legislation with respect to how demonstrators will be treated in the future. ... there have to be limits on what the police can and cannot do. There are constitutional limits; there are now serious statutory limits in the District of Columbia as well....”

“Substantial benefits have been conferred on the class in terms of significant policy changes in the areas of restrictions on police tactics through legislation that we talked about, based upon evidence that was developed by the plaintiffs and plaintiffs’ counsel in this and the other cases before Judge Sullivan and others in this court. …The First Amendment Rights and Police Standards Act of 2004 was, as I said, a direct result of this litigation….”

“One of the things that the settlement agreement also includes is even a more specific regimen of training for police that is calculated to remedy deficiencies even beyond what’s in the legislation that was passed six years ago. And the settlement agreement…mandates specific and particular training requirements.

“It also requires the Metropolitan Police Department to brief outside agencies who are brought in to assist demonstration-related duties in terms of the requirements of handling First Amendment assemblies and responding to protest situations. And that’s always been a problem historically in the District of Columbia, because first of all there’s something like 26 separate police agencies who operate within the District of Columbia, and occasionally people are brought in from departments elsewhere.

“Class counsel and the District of Columbia attorneys are in agreement that from the effective date of the First Amendment Rights and Police Standards Act in April of 2005 up until now, there has been no use of the specific practices that were challenged in this litigation….”

“With all of this in mind, and in consideration of the monetary and nonmonetary conditions of the settlement, the claims for equitable relief have been resolved, the terms reached in the resolution of this case, as I said, are historic and substantial…”

As Judge Friedman noted, “The class reaction to the settlement has been overwhelmingly positive.” The hearing was attended by Class Representatives, members of the class, the general public, a group of teachers and the media.

D.C. agrees to $13.7 million settlement in 2000 mass arrest

By Maria Glod
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 1, 2010; B04


A federal judge gave final approval Wednesday to a $13.7 million settlement between the District and people who were picked up in a mass arrest during a 2000 protest near the World Bank and International Monetary Fund buildings.
U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman said the class-action lawsuit, which has wended its way through the court for about a decade, will benefit "future generations" who want to speak out and air their grievances. He said it sparked a 2004 D.C. law that set out policies for police to follow at demonstrations, including a prohibition against encircling protesters without probable cause to arrest them.
Under the settlement, each person arrested and found eligible for compensation will be awarded $18,000, and the record of that arrest will be expunged. It also requires additional training for police officers.
"It is an important settlement. It's an historic settlement," Friedman said. "This is a fair settlement to the plaintiffs and in the interest of the First Amendment."
Mara Verheyden-Hilliard of the nonprofit Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, which represents the plaintiffs, said the case has helped change the way police respond to large-scale protests and demonstrations.
"This has been an ongoing effort to make the nation's capital hospitable to cherished First Amendment activities," Verheyden-Hilliard said.
Brian Becker, who was arrested April 15, 2000, along with his then-16-year-old son, recalled police in riot gear surrounding a group of marchers peacefully protesting problems in the U.S. prison system. Becker, a group organizer, said he was arrested, spent hours on a bus, and later had his right hand and left foot cuffed together.
"The police made a decision to arrest us not because we were doing something illegal but because we were demonstrating," he said.
Attorneys said Becker and his son are among 464 people arrested that day who have come forward and are eligible for the award. They were in a group of about 700 protesters and bystanders arrested in the area of 20th Street NW and I and K streets. An additional 26 claims are pending.
George C. Valentine, deputy attorney general for the District, said in court that officials concluded that "settling the case in a fair manner was in the best interest of the public." The city, he said, "is paying a very high price."
Other lawsuits have stemmed from mass arrests in the District in recent years. Last year, the city agreed to pay $8.25 million to almost 400 protesters and bystanders to end a class-action lawsuit over mass arrests in Pershing Park during 2002 World Bank protests, according to the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, which also represents those plaintiffs. That case is awaiting final approval.
Ike Gittlen, 56, then a local official with the steelworkers union, was heading to dinner with a date in April 2000 when they decided to walk near the World Bank to see the protests. Both were swept up in the arrest.
"I was amazed," Gittlen said. "I came from a little town where you really do believe you have right to stand up and protest and, if you are peaceful, they will let you do it. I was truly amazed that in America this could happen."

The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) is a not-for-profit legal and educational organization which, among other things, seeks to ensure government transparency in operations and constitutional accountability within police practices. The PCJF won a unanimous ruling at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals finding the MPD's unprecedented military-style police checkpoint program unconstitutional. It is counsel on the Barham and Becker class action cases in which more than 1,000 persons were falsely arrested during protests in Washington, D.C., resulting in settlements totaling $22 million. The PCJF previously uncovered and disclosed that the D.C. police employed an unlawful domestic spying and agent provocateur program in which officers were sent on long-term assignments posing as political activists and infiltrated lawful and peaceful groups. For more information go to: www.JusticeOnline.org.