Mediaboss Marketing

A judge ruled on Thursday, June 1, 2017 that a case challenging a Burlington housing policy can proceed. JESS ALOE/FREE PRESS

184 Church Street in Burlington on Wednesday, April 6, 2016.(Photo: GLENN RUSSELL/FREE PRESS)Buy Photo

A federal judge ruled a Burlington man's lawsuit charging the city with violating his First Amendment rights can proceed.

Joseph Montagno filed the lawsuit last fall claiming the city violated his rights by pressuring his landlord to evict him for calling 911 too many times.

The ruling, issued on Thursday by Judge Christina Reiss, mostly denied the city's request to dismiss the case.

In the original complaint, Montagno's American Civil Liberties Union lawyer, Jay Diaz, argued that his client's right to free speech had been "chilled" by the city's actions.

More: Lawsuit: Man evicted for calling BPD 'too frequently'

If his factual allegations are true, Reisswrote, "he has plausibly alleged a retaliation claim."

The judge dismissed several other parts of the lawsuit. Eileen Blackwood, Burlington's City Attorney, said she was pleased that the court had narrowed the issues.

She also said it was early in the proceeding.

"Motions to dismiss are often not granted because the court has to give the benefit of the doubt to the plaintiff," she said.

Burlington city attorney Eileen Blackwood.(Photo: KEVIN HURLEY/for the FREE PRESS, FILE)

Montagno claimed in the lawsuitthat the Burlington Police Department and Code Enforcement office kept track of his calls to the police department, and then pressured his landlord into evicting him.

"We're very pleased with the ruling," said Jay Diaz, Montagno's American Civil Liberties Union lawyer. "Mr. Montagno is looking forward to pressing his case against the city."

Jay Diaz, staff attorney with the Vermont ACLU, in February 2015.(Photo: KEVIN HURLEY/for the Free Press)

Diaz said his client was able to eventually secure housing in Burlington after being evicted from his Church Street apartment, with the help of several local nonprofits such as Vermont Legal Aid and Champlain Housing Trust.

He said one goal of the lawsuit was to end the alleged policy, as well as to encourage the city to focus more on supporting people who need help.

"They were among the most vulnerable Burlington residents," he said about the residents of the Church Street building where Montagno lived. "They were low-income, many of them had disabilities."

Blackwood said she does not believe that Burlington hasa "caller retaliation policy."

"We don't think there was any attempt to chill First Amendment rights," she said.

Contact Jess Aloe at 802-660-1874 or jaloe@freepressmedia.com. Follow her on Twitter @jess_aloe

Read or Share this story: http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2017/06/02/first-amendment-case-against-burlington-can-proceed/365698001/

Read this article:
First Amendment case against Burlington can proceed - BurlingtonFreePress.com

The essence of journalism is supposed to be rooted in fact based objectivity. The Missoulian and Gazettes' 24th-hour reversal of their Gianforte endorsement is the equivalent of Dick Cheney removing himself from the tip of the spear that was meant to kill LGBT rights only after his daughter came out.

Now, more than ever, the First Amendment must be utilized as of one of the pillars this country was built upon in order for our democracy to endure the whims of awfulness humanity is frequently compelled to act upon. Now is not the time to use the The First Amendment, and the journalistic integrity heavily implied therein, as a crutch used to limp into our common future.

If all it takes for an entity like The Missoulian to find their moral compass is to have their agenda, or in this case their endorsement, come back bite them in the butt, and hurt one of their own, only serves to highlight their bias, and make it more transparent to how far removed they are from objectivity and truth.

Journalists are supposed to not only weather, but be at home in the eye of the storm.

Read more:
First Amendment must remain as a pillar of country - The Bozeman Daily Chronicle

Student journalists and their teachers and advisers just gained greater First Amendment protections under a new Vermont law.

The Vermont Press Association is pleased the Legislature moved quickly this year to provide proper First Amendment safeguards for student-journalists and their advisers, said association President Adam Silverman, an editor and writer at the Burlington Free Press. School superintendents, principals and other administrators should refrain from censoring student publications. That is why there is a First Amendment.

The Vermont law, recently signed by Gov. Phil Scott, protects student journalists against retaliation for writing articles that address controversial political issues.The bill also blocks retaliation against teachers and advisers for articles written by students.

Silverman said the law places speech in journalistic publications on par with students rights to speak on their T-shirts, leaflets, flyers, armbands and in all other parts of the school day.

The new statute, along with an unrelated shield law bill, which also has been signed by Gov. Scott, were the two top priorities for the press association going into the legislative session, Silverman said.

Student-journalists representing Burlington High, Bellows Free Academy-St. Albans, Woodstock Union and the University of Vermont were among witnesses who testified in favor of the new law.

A noted First Amendment law school professor, a longtime award-winning journalist and a university newspaper adviser also affirmed the need for the legislation in Vermont.

The Vermont students testified about some pushback they received at their schools when trying to cover stories that had been reported by local professional media outlets.The stories included reports on an impasse being declared for teacher negotiations, a study of handicapped accessibility in school buildings, sexting cases by students and local rallies outside schools for Black Lives Matter.

The Senate Education Committee and the full chamber passed the bill unanimously. The bill got mired in the House for two months before the education and judiciary committees considered it. The House eventually gave the bill the green light.

Scott met with some of the witnesses for a ceremonial bill signing Thursday in South Burlington. He told the group that journalists play an important role in society and also said it was important for young Vermonters to be active in politics.

If we want to change the direction of this country or this state,you have to get involved, right?You have to get there, you have to step up, Scott said. Having the press be able to tell the stories without being victimized is important in keeping politicians honest.

Read more:
New state law protects First Amendment rights - Stowe Today

The ACLU of Kansas says a new policy adopted by the Shawnee Mission School Board may violate the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment. It has sent a letter to Board President Sarah Goodburn, urging the board to rescind the policy.

In its letter, the ACLU highlights an exchangeGoodburn had with a parent at a board meeting May 22. At that meeting, resident Jeff Passanraised concerns about an alleged conflict of interest by board member Deb Zila, involving Zila's vote to approve a new district contract with insurance broker CBIZ. CBIZ employs Zila's daughter.

After naming Zila, Passan was interrupted by Goodburn.

"You got this beforehand? What we can and cannot talk about in open forum? Naming specific people is really not allowed," Goodburn said.

She was apparently referring to the Board's recently modified guidelines for speakers at a meeting. It says, in part, that speakers should be "civil, use respectful language and refrain from any personal attacks." The policy also states "matters related to a specific student or employee" should not be discussed.

In a video of the May 22 meeting, Passan looks briefly flummoxed, then responds to Goodburn:

"So, if in the future there is a particular vote which I, as a person who lives in the Shawnee Mission School District, disagree with and want to publicly ask about that, am I not allowed to do that?" he asked.

Goodburn can be heard on the video responding to Passan, repeating the wording of the guidelines. After Passaninterjects that he is "being civil and respectful", Goodburn says: "You can say a 'board member' but a specific board member you cannot say."

The Shawnee Mission Post reported Goodburn later acknowledged Passan had not technically been in violation of the speaker guidelines because Zilais not an employee of the district.

The ACLU, in its letter, says that's not good enough.

"People have a well-established First Amendment right to criticize both elected officials and other public servants," the letter says (emphasis by the ACLU). "By prohibiting commenters from discussing "matters related to a specific student or employee", the Board's current guidelines are overbroad and inconsistent with the First Amendment."

The letter ends by urging the board to "remove the guidelines" and "in the future, refrain from admonishing commenters who mention board members by name."

In an emailed statement, a district spokesperson wrote the district had received the ACLU's letter.

"As the Board continues its review of draft guidelines," the spokesperson wrote, "it will take the comments in the letter into consideration as it balances the privacy rights of individual students and employees with the free speech rights of individual citizens."

Kyle Palmer is KCUR's morning newscaster. You can follow him on Twitter @kcurkyle.

See more here:
ACLU Says Shawnee Mission School Board Policy Violates First ... - KCUR

Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler speaks during a press conference on January 17, 2017 in Portland. Don Ryan / AP

"It may be tempting to shut down speech we disagree with, but once we allow the government to decide what we can say, see, or hear, or who we can gather with, history shows us that the most marginalized will be disproportionately censored and punished for unpopular speech," said the organization in a statement immediately following Wheeler's call to block the parades.

"The mayor is not just anyone on the street, he's a government official who has to uphold the Constitution," said Mathew dos Santos, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon. "And he's not doing that," he said.

"Portland has a proud history of protest. I am a firm supporter of the First Amendment, no matter the views expressed. I believe we had a case to make about the threats to public safety posed by this rally at this place and at this time. My job is to protect the safety of everyone... protesters, counter-protesters, and bystanders alike," said Wheeler in a

Alt-right groups have scheduled a "Trump Free Speech Rally," on June 4. A "March against Sharia" event was scheduled for June 10 but organizers decided to cancel the rally in Portland and move it to Seattle instead.

Organizers felt the city was no longer safe for them.

"Due to Mayor Wheeler's inflammatory comments and what we feel is an incitement of violence, he has shamefully endangered every scheduled participant. Consequently, in order to ensure the safety of those who had planned on attending, we have taken the decision to cancel the Portland March Against Sharia," wrote the organization planning the march in a

June 4th parade organizer Joey Gibson said the mayor "needs to sit down and take a minute and listen," and feels that he is trying to "pin" Jeremy Christian on his movement.

Christian, who was arraigned on

The City of Portland has already

Wheeler also urged the federal government to follow in his footsteps and revoke federal permits issued to the group.

But the U.S. General Services Administration, charged with issuing permits, announced on Wednesday that it would allow the parades.

"All rules and regulations were followed by the applicant for the permit, including the timeframe for review. Since the permit was lawfully obtained to assemble at this federal location, GSA has no basis to revoke the permit," the agency said in a statement.

Revoking permits amounts to government suppression of speech, which has always been illegal, dos Santos said. You cannot withhold permits based on people's viewpoints, he said.

The case is a mirror image of another First Amendment battle out near Chicago 40 years ago.

In 1977, a neo-Nazi organization chose to stage their parade in the suburban Chicago town of Skokie, which at the time was home to thousands of Holocaust survivors.

Parade goers were slated to wear Nazi uniforms and emulate salutes and anti-Jewish chants from Nazi Germany.

Outraged community members tried to put a stop to the parade by using the same arguments set forth by Wheeler. The group said the parade promotes hate speech that would inflict emotional distress upon survivors of the Holocaust.

A girl leaves a message at a makeshift memorial for two men on May 29, 2017 in Portland. The men were killed on a commuter train while trying to stop another man from harassing two young women who appeared to be Muslim. Terray Sylvester / Reuters

Ultimately the Nazi group, represented by the ACLU, won at the Supreme Court level and was legally allowed to march under the first amendment. The group ended up holding a rally downtown instead.

"Part of the problem with hate speech is that it's in the eye of the beholder," said Geoffrey Stone, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School. "There is no neutral way to decide what hate speech is and courts will not even attempt it," he said.

The alt-right group has not made any indication that they are planning to incite imminent danger or violence during the parade, which may be questionable under the law, he said. "The idea that you can ban speech because it's offensive or may cause anxiety is not consistent with the first amendment."

Thus far, the alt-right group has not brought suit against the city for revoking their permits, but if the situation does arise, it's an open and shut case, Stone said.

"It's inconceivable to me that a court would uphold the mayor's argument," he said. "This is long standing, well-settled law, and the mayor has it completely wrong," he said.

The rest is here:
Does the First Amendment Protect Alt-Right Parades in Portland? - NBCNews.com