Pro-Lifers' First Amendment Rights – New City Council Videos
Posted by JT on Friday, November 16th, 2007
As Eric captured in his Tuesday blog, the last City Council meeting addressed concerns over the growing restrictions on Pro-Lifers’ basic rights. With each new event, Aurora officials further erode our freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution – the right to free speech, the right to assemble peaceably – and this issue is now at the forefront of the Planned Parenthood controversy.
Eric depicted a number of First Amendment violations in his speech, including those witnessed at the October 27 “Here for Life” rally. Dale Hammond also gave a first-hand account of events from that day, highlighting the confusing and conflicting directions given by the police.
William Powell, the Aurora Chief of Police, then gave his version of events. The Chief seemed rather uninformed about the legal agreements in place for the rally – he questioned why the pro-life side had no permit, even though the City’s own outside counsel approved amplification for our speakers, without any permit requirement.
The Chief included stern warnings for those who disobey his directives – “[I will not] debate with you why I’m asking you to do what I want you to do… you do not address that with me or my police officers in the street… if you do, you’re likely to get a free ride down to the police station.”
Officer Powell concluded with a promise to “enforce the laws of this city, the laws of the state, and the federal government.” We can only hope and pray that he keeps his word. Pro-lifers have been exceedingly committed to following the laws in Aurora – it will be a pleasant change to have the city do the same and start enforcing the laws that protect our rights.
Click Here for Chief Powell's Speech
I will say this much in defense of Chief Powell: in his comments at the city council meeting he correctly refered to those praying and rallying as "pro-life." Not once but three times! In these days of officialdom's bias against pro-lifers this is a major victory.
But then in today's edition of the Beacon (Friday, Nov.16) the chief claims the police have been "abused" by the protesters and he promises there will be a tougher response (read: arrests) if they do not comply with his commands. Aside from making us all out to be fringe types that are troublemakers and that we make a habit of non-compliance the chief's comments were just plain wrong.
If the chief would look at the substantial videotape footage of last month's event that was taken by his own officers he would see very clearly that every time the crowd was given a directive they complied. There was no mass disobedience. There was no "abuse" of the police. There were, however, some questions raised after the people gathered there peaceably and exercising their constitutional rights were told the umpteenth time to do something different. Now stand here, now go there, now go back to where you were the first time, and finally not to stand where you were told to stand earlier. It gets to the point where people naturally begin to wonder if the authorities would ever decide on one thing.
Hint to chief Powell: You will not find a more representative sample of law abiding, tax-paying, hard working citizens in all of Aurora than those pro-lifers you mischaracterize as "abusing" the police. The best way to exercise a "hands on" approach, which you say is the way you like to operate, is to respect the intelligence of those you command and the public you are trying to direct. Things will go much more smoothly if you give CLEAR directives that DO NOT CONTRADICT the previous directives your competent command staff gave prior to your arrival on the scene.
November 16th, 2007 at 9:56 pm
I was at the city council meeting myself and I was wondering what the Chief considers "abusive behavior". I've come to think it means anyone who doesn't do what the Chief wants when he wants it. He's forgotten he's the public servant, but than there's alot of that going on in Aurora of late. Aurora the city that lost democracey. Are we still part of the United States? Do we have any constitutional righs left? I just saw a sign put up near Planned Parenthood that says NO PICKETING NO PROTESTING. Whats going on Mayor?
November 17th, 2007 at 12:06 am
I was standing behind the Chief Powell during his animated rant. He dishes out cliches and hard a** attitude like a drill sergeant. I'm not sure what "bending over backwards" means to him, but to me it would insinuate that they've (APD and the City Administration)bent the rules in our favor. I missed the last rally, but I've been involved with the police several times near PP. The rank and file have been great. Even when we brought out the graphic signs. They seem to only go over the edge or at least toward the edge after a higher ranking officer comes out with orders. I remember the candlelight vigil–moving us in off the street. It was for our safety and it's probably the law, but they don't enforce it on everyone who walks on the street. We are a target. It's easier to pick on us then find real crime. That's not to say they shouldn't be out there to ensure law and order, but they should be neutral until the law is broken. Any idiot can see that we're not there to make trouble for the citizens of Aurora…well maybe that's why…
November 17th, 2007 at 12:26 am
From Lytle v. Brewer 77 F.Supp.2d 730
"Courts have consistently held that peaceful picketing and protesting are forms of expression protected by U.S. Const. amend. I. Additionally, when speech, such as public issue picketing, is limited by a statute, either on its face or as applied, the courts must carefully scrutinize the restrictions. Indeed, public speech through picketing represents an exercise of basic constitutional rights in their most pristine and classic form and has always rested on the highest rung of the hierarchy of U.S. Const. amend. I values."
"A determination on the issue of whether an officer's actions impeded a plaintiff's exercise of U.S. Const. amend. I speech requires the weighing of two factors: (1) the type of forum where the speech takes place, and (2) the nature of the governmental restriction."
"The reasonableness of a restriction on protected speech on governmental property depends on whether the property is a traditional public forum, a created public forum, or a non-public forum. Traditional public forums, such as public parks and streets, are subject to sweeping constitutional protections. In these fora, content neutral restrictions … survive so as long as they are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest and must leave open ample alternative avenues of communication."
This is not official legal advice, but it's pretty much basic knowledge (and common sense) that they cannot harass us the way they are trying to. Not only would I dare them to actually try arresting pregnant women, children and priests while on camera – but if Ms. Weingartz or her cronies would like to try anything beyond what they did last time, it would seem to me they're walking a pretty thin legal tightrope.
November 17th, 2007 at 12:26 am
Alex,
Thanks for the post. I'd like to see them arrest soccer moms/dads, grandmas/grandpas, children to. The media would have a field day with that. I can see the headlines now:
Aurora, IL: Soccer Moms Arrested with Kids for Praying and Exercising 1st Amendment Rights of Free Speech
In Aurora, IL: Is Free Speech and Right to Protest Dead?
It Can Happen in The US: Aurora, IL Police Arrest Moms, Dads, Grandparents, Children at Aurora PP for Prayer and Protesting
It's time for completely new Aurora gov't. We need to strip Weisner of all his overreaching powers, fire Alyne W. for not incompetance of the law, remove Chief Powell for gross violations of Aurora's 1st Amendment rights. We now live in a city of darkness, not light. But we need to keep the pressure on and expose this stuff for what it is.
We must continue to fight and be active. We can change things if we are willing to participate in our communities and vote these people out! We need to talk with out neighbors and friends, even if it is uncomfortable. Time to come out of our boxes.
November 17th, 2007 at 10:16 am
If my comedic-although-inappropriate-at-times father was alive today, he would say regarding Chief Powell; "That man's all screwed up! He doesn't know whether to sh*t or go blind." This expression was a favorite of my dad's (he made up many … I'm not sure if this was an original) but it sure seems to fit in. (It's probably pretty self-explanatory.) If this is too out-of-place, just dump this comment, but I couldn't help but think of my dad's "sayings" while reading this story and commentary.
November 17th, 2007 at 10:36 am
Ms. Parker, the president of CURE*, Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education, a national conservative think tank focused on breaking the cycle of poverty, has just recently endorsed Michael Huckabee for president. For those of you who do not know, "Huck" is a 100% pro-life candidate for the presidency of the United States, and I encourage you all to look at this man in regard to his stance not just on life but all of the other issues as well. (And as an aside, I'd love to put Eric's photograph in our "Cool people who 'bee' for 'Huck'" column on our site.)
I'm heartily praying (and suffering – got a nasty migraine) for the rally today … I was in attendance at all the others, but was unable to make today's. I'll certainly make the next! God help us all help the babies.
November 17th, 2007 at 11:54 am
I'm glad to report, for those of you who could not attend today, that the police presence at the protest today was much less obtrusive. Yes, the protest was smaller (as I would expect for a monthly event), but there were no squad cars with video cameras and the police officers were across the street. As I was going to my car, I did see a police van parked in the parking lot, but at least it wasn't out there providing a threatening presence. I had to leave at 10–the toddlers were at the end of their line–so I hope it remained peaceful and respectful until the end. I rather expected to see Chief Powell there. Now that I know he wears a jogging suit and a baseball cap, I would know who he was. At the last protest, I thought he was just some guy and had no idea where his apparent authority was coming from.
November 17th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Actually, there were far too many officers present for a peaceful rally of 200 plus; additionally they were video taping the entire rally, and yes the "paddy wagon" was in attendance. With out being aggressive they were attempting to be intimidating. That's why the "show of force". If they were there to be cooperative they would have helped with traffic control when my family and I were almost run over. They would have sent officers elsewhere when they saw how small the rally was and they would meet with us to lay out ground rules for their expectations. I believe the APD are just following orders. It's the orders and from where they come that concerns me.
November 18th, 2007 at 9:48 am
Yes the police were video taping and the van was waiting there. It was intimidating. Why else, as reported in the Beacon, a peaceful man who was walking his little baby, was questioned by the police only after he pulled out a prayer book. And asked what he was praying about. If he was praying for anything else but PP would they have left him alone? That was an invasion of privacy. And persecution outright. Also, the Chief was there standing near the PP. Don't tell me he is not taking sides. As far as almost being "run over" the car knowingly took off as they crossed the street as reported. The police were only there to intimidate. They were not there to help us. In fact, they sat and watched another older couple from our group try to make several attempts to cross the street and did nothing. Not a thing. If we asked ahead of time, would they help with the traffic? Serve and protect?
November 18th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
The Chicago Tribune is reporting that when Powell was asked about the Roger Earl situation, he responded with, “If he's praying here, he's here because of the building. He can pray at home or anywhere”
I find this comment very interesting. First, someone should inform Powell that “anywhere” is inclusive of that sidewalk across the street from the clinic. Second, perhaps the City’s Corporate Counsel should let Powell know about the 14th amendment; and in particular, the equal protection clause.
With the Police spokesman Dan Ferrelli standing by, it’s amazing to me how he could make this statement.
November 18th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
Here's the link.
Aurora police, activists at odds over clinic protests
November 18th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
I also thought the paddy wagon and the close presence was an attempt at intimidation and not protection. I was actually enjoying the rally itself very much. I was singing Christmas carols and the Our Father interspersed with some verses I sang particularly for officer Powell trying to break down the barriers a little. It went something like this.
We aren't here to break the law,
We are here for a righteous cause.
Have you heard the women and the children howl?
Come join our picket to protect them Chief Powell.
He could only smile…….
He definitely has the "break the law and we'll arrest you complex to the extreme. But personal interaction is the best way to break down the barriers. I know I for one will never back away from my rights cause I am afraid of being arrested for anything that was not illegal. I think eventually these behaviours will graduate our way if we just put our trust in our God to grace us with His Holy Spirit in the name of Jesus Christ.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
I was at the rally and I found the police presence way beyond the scope of the rally and the peaceful nature of the participants. It was interesting to me to see an officer parked in his car on the opposite side of New York (from the sidewalk of the protest) get out of his car and walk along the edge of the road by other protesters holding large signs of healthy babies, engage them in conversation then cross the street, stand on one end of our picket line, then walk along the edge of the picket line nearly tripping over our memorial crosses, then stand at the other end of the picket line, then stand on a knoll overlooking the picket line and then cross half way across New York and stand in the median! Of course, all the while, the picketers were being videotaped by a policeman in another squad car parked on Oakhurst. Be aware. The police are acting in this manner only to be intrusive and disrupt our peaceful protest There was no activity that was not lawful and peaceful happening. I sure hope those officers weren't praying while they were working…oh that's right they can pray on the job or anywhere.
November 18th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
Post #13, Paul2,
Excellent post and sentiments!
November 19th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
7488a620bd0f…
7488a620bd0fdcb0eccc…
May 5th, 2008 at 8:11 pm