Dana Cody, Esq. Executive Director Catherine W. Short, Esq.

Legal Director Mary Riley Administrative Director Allison K. Aranda, Esq. Senior Staff Counsel Board of Directors John R. Streett, Esq. Chairman Dana Cody, Esq. Marcella Tyler Ketelhut Terry L. Thompson, Esq. Colette Wilson, Esq. Anthony E. Wynne, JD Advisory Board The Hon. Steve Baldwin San Diego, California The Rev. Michael R. Carey, OP, JD Colorado Daniel Cathcart, Esq. Los Angeles, California The Hon. William P. Clark Paso Robles, California Raymond Dennehy, PhD. San Francisco, California The Rev. Joseph D. Fessio, SJ San Francisco, California The Hon. Ray Haynes Riverside, California James Hirsen, Esq. Riverside, California The Hon. Howard Kaloogian Los Angeles, California David Llewellyn, Esq. Sacramento, California Anne J. OConnor, Esq. New Jersey Charles E. Rice, Esq. South Bend, Indiana Ben Stein, Esq. West Hollywood, California Andrew Zepeda, Esq. Beverly Hills, California Northern California (Administration) P.O. Box 2105 Napa, California 94558 (707) 224 6675 Southern California P.O. Box 1313 Ojai, California 93024 (805) 640 1940

September 30, 2013 Jackson City Attorney ATTN: Barbara A. Bluntson, City Prosecutor 455 E Capitol St Jackson, MS 39207 Phone 601-960-1799 Fax 601-960-1756 Sent via Facsimile RE: Arrest for Municipal Code Section 110-61 Dear Ms. Bluntson: By way of introduction, the Life Legal Defense Foundation (LLDF) is a not-forprofit organization based in Napa, California. As part of LLDFs mission, we defend the First Amendment rights of clients engaged in programs designed to educate the public about the sanctity of all human life. We do not charge our clients for our services. I am a senior staff attorney with the Life Legal Defense Foundation. Several individuals have contacted me regarding the persistent threats they have received from the Jackson Police Department (JPD). My clients have informed me that JPD officers have threatened to arrest, and in some instances already have arrested, them for purportedly violating Section 110-61 of the municipal code. JPD claims that merely standing on a public sidewalk, sitting in a chair on part of the sidewalk, and holding a sign while standing on the public sidewalk all constitute violations of the ordinance. I have reviewed the Jackson obstruction ordinance, Section 110-61. First, the obstruction ordinance is unconstitutional as applied to my clients activities. While the ordinance makes it unlawful for any person to placesignsor any obstruction of any kind upon any street, avenue, alley or sidewalk within the city, it must not impinge upon the constitutional exercise of free speech on the public sidewalk. My clients routinely stand, walk, hold signs, hand out literature and occasionally sit in a chair due to medical limitations all on the public sidewalk. Such activity is constitutionally protected, and the reasoning in Hague v. CIO, 307 U. S. 496 (1939), has never been questioned: Wherever the title of streets and parks may rest, they have immemorially been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions. Such use of the streets and public places has, from ancient times, been a part of the privileges,

LLDF.org LIFE: AT THE HEART OF THE LAW

immunities, rights, and liberties of citizens. The privilege of a citizen of the United States to use the streets and parks for communication of views on national questions may be regulated in the interest of all; it is not absolute, but relative, and must be exercised in subordination to the general comfort and convenience, and in consonance with peace and good order; but it must not, in the guise of regulation, be abridged or denied. Id. at 515-516. The City may proscribe conduct that actually obstructs the free movement of people on the sidewalk. However, this does not mean that the City may prevent speakers from standing on the sidewalk merely because they use some of the sidewalk while engaged in their free speech. In Re Wallace, 3 Cal.3d 289 (1970). The case of Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 382 U.S. 87 (1965), specifically held that any ordinance that allowed standing on the sidewalk only at the whim of a police officer was unconstitutional. If JPD contends that any person standing on a public sidewalk is partially obstructing that sidewalk by their mere presence, then the net effect of this policy would be to allow persons to stand on the sidewalk and picket only at the whim of the police officer on the beat. Such a policy is admittedly violated scores of time daily [] yet only some individuals those chosen by the police in their unguided discretion are arrested. Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451, 46-67 (1987). This would be so even though [a] peaceful picketer carrying a sign creates no more of an obstacle than a picketer carrying a cross or a pedestrian waiting for a bus. Foti v. Menlo Park, 146 F.3d 629, 642 (9th Cir. 1998). First Amendment freedoms would be meaningless if cities could simply declare that anyone exercising them on a public sidewalk was partially obstructing the sidewalk and thus violating the law. This is exactly what JPD is doing to my clients as they exercise their rights on the public sidewalks outside 2903 N. State Street in Jackson. My clients leave ample room for passersby to use the sidewalk on Fondren Place and on State Street. Moreover, countless persons pass by the shops or stop to window shop directly across the street and are never threatened with arrest for obstructing the sidewalk. Yet my clients who carry signs and actively speak to those entering the business, face arrest for obstruction while taking up the same amount of space on the sidewalk. This type of unbridled discretion to be used at the whim of a lone officer is exactly what the courts have deemed unconstitutional. It has also been brought to my attention that a few of the elderly women who, for medical reasons, occasionally sit in a chair partially on the sidewalk have been threatened with arrest for obstruction. These individuals take up less space than an individual who is confined to a wheelchair. Furthermore, the persons using chairs leave ample space for passersby to use the sidewalk. If JPD contends that these individuals are not able to exercise free speech rights on the public sidewalk because they need the assistance of a chair, JPDs application of the ordinance essentially declares the Constitution inapplicable to persons with disabilities. JPDs policy is nothing short of discriminatory. Furthermore, my clients have observed clinic escorts leaving lawn chairs, signs, and other personal items on the public right of way overnight so as to stake out their spot for the next day. These activities have been documented in photographs. JPD has never threatened the clinic escorts with arrest or asked them to remove the items. Rather, JPD allows the clinic escorts to leave these obstructions on the sidewalk unattended so that no one is able to traverse the public right of way. It has also been noted that there are handmade signs posted at the gate by the clinic escorts that are woven into the gate in violation of Jackson Municipal Code section 102-32 (6). Photographs have been taken to document the violations as well. Again, JPD has not threatened to arrest the clinic escorts for unlawfully displaying these signs. Nor has JPD asked them to
LIFE: AT THE HEART OF THE LAW LLDF.org

remove the signs. Similarly, my clients have observed supporters of the mayor place chairs on the sidewalk in strategic locations throughout the city during mayoral elections in the past. These activities are documented in photographs too. Once again, JPD has not arrested or threatened to arrest these supporters of the mayor. JPDs disparate treatment towards and perpetual harassment of my clients must stop. A few years ago JPD engaged in this very same type of discriminatory enforcement of the noise and sound ordinances against my clients. A federal civil rights lawsuit was filed in order to protect my clients rights and to stop the citys blatant discrimination and to recover all monetary expenses incurred to defend against the false charges. If JPD does not immediately cease arresting my clients and threatening to arrest my clients for allegedly obstructing the sidewalk in front of 2903 N. State Street in Jackson, we will take prompt legal action to protect their free speech rights in federal court. I look forward to your prompt response to this matter. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely,

Allison K. Aranda, Senior Staff Counsel Life Legal Defense Foundation PO Box 890685 Temecula, CA 92589 Phone 951-296-2835 Fax 951-541-2711

cc: Jackson Police Department, Pro-life Mississippi

LIFE: AT THE HEART OF THE LAW LLDF.org