Embed
Email

THE ACLU OF OREGON URGES NO VOTE ON HB Eng

Document Sample

Shared by: alice jenny
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
1
posted:
12/21/2011
language:
pages:
1
THE ACLU OF OREGON URGES A

“NO” VOTE ON HB 3241 A-Eng.



The ACLU of Oregon respectfully urges you to vote “No” on HB 3241 A-Eng., the “funeral

protest” bill because we believes HB 3241 A-Eng. violates Article I, sections 8, 20 and 21 of the

Oregon Constitution as well as the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S.

Constitution. We previously provided a legal memo setting out the details. In short:



Section 1 of HB 3241 A-Eng. – Reservation Buffer Zones

This Section sets forth an application for “reservations” granted by public officials or private

funeral directors that exclude the public from areas around funerals, including sidewalks and

streets (with a few vaguely defined exceptions). This reservation system is not a content-neutral

time, place and manner restriction. It gives unfettered discretion to public and private individuals

to grant or deny applications.



A similar permit restriction was rejected under the First Amendment, despite the City of

Portland’s argument that it was a permissible time, place and manner restriction. In Gathright v.

City of Portland, 439 F3d 573, 578 (9th Cir. 2006), the City attempted to restrict a preacher from

city-permitted events at Pioneer Courthouse Square and Waterfront Park.



“Gathright may be a gadfly to those with views contrary to his own, but First

Amendment jurisprudence is clear that the way to oppose offensive speech is by more

speech, not censorship, enforced silence or eviction from legitimately occupied public

space.”



Section 3 of HB 3241 A-Eng. – Crime of Disrupting Funeral Protest

This section makes it a crime to disrupt a funeral service with the intent to cause “annoyance” by

making “unreasonable noise” or otherwise cause a disturbance within 1,000 feet of a funeral.

Basing this on Oregon’s disorderly conduct statute does not make it constitutional. Instead, it

attempts to place restrictions based on speech and fails to clearly define the crime with enough

certainty so that individuals will know what is or is not allowed.



The Motivation of the Phelps Family

We know that the Phelps family seeks media attention to spew their hateful ideas, specifically

near funeral services. And sadly, they treat laws like the one proposed here as an invitation to

come to this state, engage in just the activity HB 3241 A-Eng. seeks to prevent and win large

awards, including attorney fees, which can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.



As Professor Steven McAllister from Kansas wrote:



“The more attention the Westboro Baptist Church receives, the more likely its members

are to continue and even to expand their activities. Paying them no notice whatsoever,

or viewing their presence near a funeral as a sort of badge of honor for the deceased and

the mourners, would be the truest triumph of all. And unquestionably constitutional.”

55 U Kan L Rev 575, 613 (2006-2007).



For all these reasons, we respectfully urge you to vote “NO” on HB 3241 A-Eng.



Related docs
Other docs by alice jenny
Mine Manager
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
SCHEDULE OF DEPARTMENT SPECIFIC LEGISLATION
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Base Metals Please See Disclaimer on the Last
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
ONLINE REQUISITIONS AND APPROVALS
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Building the Trust Framework
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
Sn mka vomiting
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
Welcome denver truck accident
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
The Dy fine
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!