Tag Archives: first amendment

Business v. Class Action

How much are you signing away to get that sweet, sweet 1994 Toyota Tercel?

An article in the New York Times caught my attention today.  It’s about the fallout from the 2011 Supreme Court decision in AT&T v. Concepcion, which stated that corporations can write clauses into contracts to prevent class action lawsuits.  To do this, the clauses require customers to settle disputes through arbitration (instead of in an actual court of law) and to relinquish their right to litigate as a class.  In effect, the contracts waive the customers’ right to due process.  Since that decision, the legal world has changed.  For the better or for worse?

Keep reading the full post to see what’s up with these clauses and to learn a tip on how to get around them.

Read more

Videotaping Police: Dangerous, Lucrative, and Constitutionally Protected

Caught on camera

Two court settlements have come down this week that shine light on the increasingly-common practice of videotaping police officers.  In Las Vegas, Mitchell Crooks was beaten  up by a police officer while videotaping a burglary investigation across the street from his house.  In Boston, attorney Simon Glik was arrested and prosecuted under wiretapping laws for using his cell phone to record an arrest of another man.  All charges were dropped in both cases, but both men also sued for violations to their civil rights.  In both cases, they reached a settlement before going to court for a judgement, with Crooks receiving $100,000 and Glik receiving $170,000.  Nearly 6 months ago, Glik’s case even went to the 1st Circuit Appeals Court, where they upheld the rights of citizens to record public police action in a landmark, often-cited decision.

Click to read more after the jump

Free Speech Lawsuit Settled for $75,000

Protect our rights

The First Amendment guarantees the right to free speech to all people, even if you don’t agree with what they’re saying.  The town of South Hadley in Massachusetts learned that the hard way, as they have paid out a large sum of money for attempting to silence a critic at a public school board meeting in April, 2010.  Luke Gelinas was at the meeting to read a prepared statement in which he criticized the school board’s inaction regarding the bullying of a student — inaction which may have led to the student’s suicide.  According to the Boston Globe, Gelinas was interrupted by school board member Edward Boisselle, who told him “you’re done” and explicitly said “this is not your First Amendment right”.  In fact, it was not only Gelinas’s right to speak at a meeting with public officials, but I would also argue that it is Boisselle’s duty to uphold that right.  Gelinas was escorted out of the meeting, but wasn’t finished.  He filed a complaint and has waged a two-year legal battle to affirm his rights.  Today, via a settlement of $75,000, he has been vindicated.

What kind of country would we be if all detractors and critics and informed intellectuals were silenced by those in power and led out of the room for holding an unpopular opinion?  Well, we’d be 18th-century Britain.  This is exactly the reason the Declaration of Independence was written.  “Taxation without representation”, a popular phrase at the time, was really more about how the British government refused to listen to the needs of the colonists.  The Americans were, to draw a parallel to this case, told to leave and that they did not have the right to speak freely in Parliament.  In response, they waged a revolution, built a new country, and the rest is history.  While I’m not about to recommend breaking ties with South Hadley and forming a new city, I will posit this case as a reminder that the Bill of Rights is a document crafted to protect the people of the US from their government, and this is precisely why.

Banned Basketball Mom Wins $63k in Civil Rights Settlement

Off the court

A Pittsburgh mother who was banned from her daughter’s high school basketball games has won a $63,500 settlement with her school district in a discrimination dispute.  Diane Wickstrom claimed that she was banned from the school’s basketball games and practices for no just cause after she sent an email concerning her daughter’s team.  After the email, the Peters Township Athletic Association imposed a new rule closing practices to the public, which Wickstrom claimed was enforced exclusively on her.  Lawyers for the basketball mom argued that the banning was an infringement on her First Amendment rights, with the ban occurring under “false premises”.  As part of the settlement, the township’s insurer will pay Wickstrom $55,000 and the school district $8,500, and Wickstrom, of course, has been readmitted to her daughter’s basketball games.

Read more at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

$6.2 Million Settlement for Arrested Protestors

The right to protest

Last week, the City of Chicago agreed to settle with the group of Iraq War protesters who were unjustly arrested in 2003 to the tune of $6.2 million.  The Chicago Tribune reports that an appellate court decided last year that the 800 citizens were detained or arrested without warrant.  Since then, the city and the protesters have been in arbitration to settle the case outside of the court system.  Though the settlement still has to be approved by the city council, it is likely less expensive than continuing to litigate.

The decision marks a stern victory for the First Amendment as well as the Fourth, which protects against unlawful search and seizure.  In the wake of the appellate decision, the City of Chicago has changed its tactics against protesters, as seen in the recent Occupy protests.  Now, the police apparently give the protesters ample time to leave before they are arrested.  The question for the police and the protesters alike is now, “Is that enough to guarantee the first amendment right to assemble?”