ACLU Loses Fight To Silence Dissent #VB115
September 30, 201210 Comments
Full Disclosure Network(R) presents a 12 minute video news blog featuring Paul Orfanedes of Judicial Watch who explains how a Superior Court Judge Terry A. Green allowed the ACLU to intervene in the Case Sturgeon vs City of Los Angeles( BC484190) but did not permit them recover their legal fees from the citizen plaintiff. The ACLU’s attempt to recover legal fees would have discouraged the citizen complaint from going forward as it would have a chilling effect on the First Amendment according to Orfanedes who pointed out that the ACLU who has long been a defender of First Amendment and by taking this action would have a chilling impact on a citizens’ right to oppose a government policy. At issue is LAPD’s Special Order 7 that would prevent police officers from impounding the cars of illegal aliens who are driving without a license. and in the case contends that the City does not have the authority to enact Special Order 7 to prevent police from impounding the cars of illegal drivers. According saying that State Law requires that all traffic laws be uniform throughout the state to avoid confusion where block to block the differing traffic rules from one city to another. At the end of the video viewers are asked to participate in a survey regarding the policy and the ACLU attempt to collect legal fees from a citizen challenging the Special Order 7. Please participate in the survey by going to http://www.fulldisclosure.net
- State law encourages citizens to file lawsuits against unfair government policies. In this case the ACLU was asking to intervene so that citizens would be forced to pay their legal fees? do you think this would deter citizens from challenging unfair laws? YES or NO?
- Do you think that we need laws that protect special classes for people rather than equal protection for all? YES or NO?
- The ACLU has always been an advocate for the First Amendment and free speech do you think their actions here will diminish their credibility? YES or NO?
1) Original Complaint filed by Police Protective League 107165310-Sturgeon-v-City-of-Los-Angeles-Complaint and joined by Sturgeon vs City of Los Angeles BV484190
2) Judicial Watch, for Sturgeon objected toACLU intervention/demand for legal fees: http://www.fulldisclosure.net/2012/09/aclu-loses-fight-to-silence-dissent/plaintff-response-motiontointervene/
3) ACLU Reply http://www.fulldisclosure.net/2012/09/aclu-loses-fight-to-silence-dissent/aclu-reply-motion-to-intervene-2/
- L.A. Deputy District Attorney Target of Ethics Complaint #VB57
- Sheriff Baca & The ACLU… Partners in Jail Reform? #494
- Are Judicial Double Benefits Constitutional? Judges To Rule on Judges Benefits Round II #VB92
- Jail Crisis, Judges & the ACLU #VB45
- Citizens Fight City Hall & Non-Voter Approved Cop Bonds #458-459