A federal judge in Mississippi is taking a "hands-off" approach in a case in which police officers are accused of harassing pro-life protesters and allowing thieves to walk away with their property.
Judge Carlton Reeves of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi refused a preliminary injunction that would protect "victims of harassment" as preparations are made for a trial scheduled for next spring.
Allison Aranda, senior staff counsel for the Life Legal Defense Foundation, which filed the lawsuit, said her group is "deeply disappointed in the court's failure to protect the clearly established free speech rights of the people of Mississippi."
"It is a sad day where in the birthplace of the civil rights movement a court refuses to protect the constitutional rights of politically disfavored speech," she said. "If the Supreme Court had turned a blind eye to the free speech rights of anti-segregation demonstrators as the court did toward pro-life sidewalk counselors we would not be where we are today as a nation!"
As WND reported, a July 17 video backs the accusation that police officers in Jackson, Mississippi, were letting thieves walk away with the property of pro-life activists who were exercising their First Amendment rights on public sidewalks.
The video shows the activists approaching police and reporting the thefts. An officer, who is holding a drink and appears to be leaning up against a vehicle, states: "I see that. I'm dealing with something right now."
The video accompanied the foundation's lawsuit against the city's police department over the officers' behavior.
The complaint was filed by Pro-Life Mississippi and a number of individuals against Police Chief Lindsay Horton, the city and officers Jesse Robinson, James McGowan, Mary James, Marie Hampton, James Ross and Willis Thomas.
The police department declined WND's request for comment.
Dana Cody, president and executive director of the foundation, said the Jackson Police Department "has routinely harassed pro-life citizens, who have been peacefully exercising their legal right to oppose abortion in the public square and offer information about life-affirming alternatives to women seeking abortion."
Cody said the complaint accuses the police department of blatant and ongoing violations of the free speech rights of the activists protesting the state's only abortion business, the Jackson Women's Health Organization.
See the video:
In the most recent trip to the courthouse, the foundation had asked for an order to protect the pro-life activists from "harassment" by Jackson police.
The foundation had asked the judge to declare the Jackson police actions against pro-life advocates to be unconstitutional, declare the city in contempt of a legal consent decree that was supposed to resolve questions years ago, prohibit police from interfering with lawful pro-life speech on public sidewalks and prohibit police from using threats against the activists.
According to a foundation report, Senior Staff Counsel Allison Aranda and local counsel Steve Thornton "called witness after witness to describe the years of threatening, harassing conduct pro-lifers endured from Jackson police officers."
"This conduct included issuing numerous citations and threats of arrest for constitutionally protected activity such as leafleting and standing with signs on the public sidewalk outside the Jackson Women's Health Organization," the foundation said.
Cody said: "We are very concerned about the potential for police mistreatment of our clients as this case awaits its day in court. That is why we sought preliminary relief."
The case claims police have been citing pro-lifers for "offenses" such as getting out of a legally parked car or allowing a protest sign to touch the sidewalk.
The legal team argues such threats have no legal basis and constitute harassment by police.
The July 17 video, the complaint says, records Jackson police "standing by as an individual stole the group's pro-life display."
"As a group member asked an officer to do something about it, the policeman – leaning back against a squad car and hold a beverage 'to go' cup – responded, without moving. 'I'm dealing with something right now.'"
The legal team said such behavior is not unusual, and the lawsuit seeks declaratory judgment, injunctive relief and damages.
Cited as background in the case is a March 2008 consent order against the city, the police chief and a number of officers that was issued because of a "pervasive policy of violating the free speech rights of pro-life advocates."
That order required training in First Amendment rights for law enforcement personnel.
The lawsuit alleges:
- In June, there were threats of arrest for exiting a parked vehicle to share pro-life literature on a public sidewalk.
- In March, there were multiple threats of arrest and orders that pro-life speakers move.
- In February and in December 2013 there were arrests of people with pro-life signs or literature for sitting in chairs on public property
- Other arrests have been made of people holding pro-life signs.
Charges were dismissed in most instances and the legal firm said that in some instances, police even refused to inform the courts of the charges.