ORANGE, Calif. --The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California has filed suit in U.S. District Court against the California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) to protect the free-speech and religion rights of those who feed the poor.

The suit seeks to overturn an unconstitutionally broad state law that allowed park rangers to interfere with an open-air feeding at Doheny State Park in early February organized by Welcome INN (Interfaith Needs Network), an interfaith religious group.

"Our work is motivated by the belief that acts of charity toward the poor and homeless are an essential part of religious worship," said James Siler, president and founding member of Welcome INN. "I personally believe that the Holy Spirit flows through me as I am feeding someone."

Welcome INN volunteers gathered at the park at 4:30 p.m. on February 5 and 6 to serve donated food to about 20 homeless people in the park's picnic area. Before the 45-minute meal, they conducted a prayer, and throughout, they distributed Bibles, counseled the guests, and referred those who requested them to area social services.

But on February 7, as members unloaded supplies, a uniformed park ranger approached them and told them they were engaging in an unlawful assembly and violating section 4321 of the California State Administrative Code. If they did not leave immediately, he said, he would start writing citations.

'I believe very deeply in the work of Welcome INN, but I do not want to risk being cited or arrested,' said Patricia Church, who was in charge of the meal giveaway . 'I especially don't want to risk this for our guests.'

The volunteers complied with rangers' orders, but in the days that followed, they appealed to Richard Haydon, acting superintendent of the park, who told them nothing they could say would change DPR's stance. The group members have not returned since.

'I know that I will risk citation and arrest if I go out with Welcome INN to Doheny,' Church said. 'Without a court order, I won't go there again.'

State authorities violated the First Amendment rights of Welcome INN members to freedom of speech and religion, because the members' actions - including feeding the poor - are a form of expression and an essential part of worship. Preventing them from ministering to the poor, then, keeps them from worshipping as they see fit, said Hector Villagra, director of the Orange County office of the ACLU/SC.

According to the complaint, section 4321 is an unlawful prior restraint on free speech because it allows state officials to deny the use of a public forum in advance of whatever speech might take place, and it does not give them narrow, objective and definite standards to guide their regulation of the use of public spaces.

'When I led our group to Doheny State Park in February, I felt this was a place where we would be away from residents and business people who might complain,' Siler said. 'We are not disturbing the peace. We are not inciting a riot. We are simply feeding our friends in the same manner that most of us have done for years; this is not much different than when families or others gather in the park.'

Park rangers have apparently not cited anyone else eating at Doheny State Park who did not conduct a religious service or engage in other types of expression, which makes the violations of Welcome INN members' free speech, free assembly and freedom of religion rights even more blatant.

'This case, involving some of our most cherished rights, underscores just how fragile they are,' Villagra said. 'Because of the ACLU's work to prevent government-sponsored religion, it is often assumed that the ACLU does not zealously defend the right of religious groups, including Christians, to practice their religion. This case shows that assumption is just plain wrong.'

Date

Thursday, May 8, 2008 - 12:00am

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

First Amendment and Democracy Religious Liberty

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

68

Style

Standard with sidebar

Michael Buday had no idea the State of California would take his simple request to get a new driver's license with his wife's surname and turn it into a two-year ordeal. But that's exactly what happened in this state where - until the ACLU of Southern California intervened - there was no state law guaranteeing the rights of both married couples and registered domestic partners to choose their own names. Today, Michael and Diana Bijon celebrated their happy ending at the Santa Monica office of the DMV. Read all about it. Photo courtesy of Brandon Wise, Santa Monica Daily Press.

Date

Monday, May 5, 2008 - 12:00am

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Criminal Justice and Drug Policy Reform

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

68

Style

Standard with sidebar

LOS ANGELES, Calif. - One year and numerous investigations later, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) has still not addressed the root causes of last year's melee in MacArthur Park in which hundreds of peaceful demonstrators and journalists were beaten and injured by LAPD officers, according to the ACLU of Southern California.

In a status report filed May 1, 2008 in U.S. District Court, ACLU/SC attorneys charge that despite a clear department policy against excessive use of force, the officers and supervisors of the Metropolitan Division, who were in charge of keeping the peace, had 'drifted towards not merely a practice but a trained policy of unconstitutional use of force for peaceful demonstrators.'

What makes this finding so troubling, the report continues, is that it fits with longstanding critiques of the LAPD as an institution where such behavior is condoned.

These conclusions by the ACLU/SC are based in part on the LAPD's own May Day report, released in October of 2007 which states: ''_some of the officers and supervisors in Mac Arthur Park believed baton strikes could be used to compel a person to disperse, even if they were merely standing in front of the officers, failing to respond to direction.'

The LAPD report further criticizes the absence of oversight, which 'allowed the quality and content of Metropolitan Division's training to degrade over time'_. Further evidence revealed that some policies were taught incorrectly'_.'

'What is remarkable here is that after an entire year, they have failed to examine how training and practice in the department's elite Metropolitan Division degraded,' said Mark Rosenbaum, legal director of the ACLU/SC. 'That is a crucial question for a department now subject to a consent decree aimed at rooting out a culture of unconstitutional practices and excessive force.'

In 2000, in response to corruption scandals surrounding the department's Rampart Division, the U.S. Justice Department found that officers routinely violated the constitutional rights of Los Angeles residents. The findings led to a consent decree that installed a special monitor to insure the department would make necessary reforms.

The ACLU/SC, which is a party to the decree, is asking the court to direct the independent monitor to investigate how the training in the Metropolitan Division failed and recommend changes to insure this doesn't happen in the future.

'In the last year the LAPD has made a number of positive changes in its approach to crowd control tactics and training,' said Peter Bibring, staff attorney for the ACLU/SC, 'but until the LAPD finds out how officers came to believe this kind of unconstitutional conduct was appropriate, incidents of excessive force by officers will continue.'

Date

Monday, May 5, 2008 - 12:00am

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

68

Style

Standard with sidebar

Pages

Subscribe to ACLU of Southern California RSS