ACLU-NM
Contact Us   |   Submit a Complaint   |   Español
Take Note
Multimedia
More »
Archives

Articles Tagged ‘1st Amendment’

ACLU Is a Partner, Not an Enemy, of Free Religion

Micah McCoy ACLU Is a Partner, Not an Enemy, of Free Religion

Micah McCoy, Communications Specialist

Most people know the American Civil Liberties Union as one of the oldest and fiercest defenders of religious liberty in the nation. However, Steve Smothermon, the pastor of Legacy Church in Albuquerque, was recently quoted in the Journal accusing the ACLU of attacking his religious beliefs. If Smothermon examined the situation more closely, he’d see that the ACLU’s concerns have nothing to do with his faith, but with defending the freedom of all people to practice their faith – or no faith at all – without governmental interference.

In recent years, the ACLU:

• Joined forces with the American Family Association, filing a lawsuit that freed a Christian preacher, who was jailed for 109 days for street preaching in Portales;

• Defended the right of evangelical Christians to preach on the sidewalks of the Strip in Las Vegas, Nev.;

• Intervened on behalf of a group of Massachusetts high school students who were suspended for distributing candy canes and a religious message at school;

• Opposed a Texas high school’s policy prohibiting students from wearing visible crosses and rosaries.

And the list goes on. The ACLU has filed hundreds of lawsuits to protect Americans’ First Amendment right to freely exercise their religion. But the Free Exercise Clause is only half of the First Amendment’s protection of religious freedom. The ACLU is also proud of its work defending the rights of everyone by ensuring that the Establishment Clause is fully respected. It was this work that Smothermon objected to so strongly, namely the ACLU’s opposition to the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office using Legacy Church as a venue for its new deputies’ graduation ceremony.

Doubtless Smothermon offered the use of Legacy’s facilities in a spirit of service to the community, but Sheriff Dan Houston should have thanked him and declined. The community is not served when the county’s top cop conducts state business in a house of worship and compels his subordinates to attend.

Article II, § 11 of the New Mexico Constitution provides that “No person shall be required to attend any place of worship …” Forcing public servants to attend their own graduation ceremony in a place of worship is not just wrong, it’s against the cherished principles of religious freedom that undergird our nation and our state.

Some of the more callous observers of this controversy have said that the church is “just another building.” But places of worship are more than just buildings; they are emblematic of and associated with the beliefs espoused by the faith community and its leaders.

Should gay deputies and deputies with gay family members be forced to graduate on the same stage that hosted Scott Lively, an advocate for the criminalization of homosexuality and the author of “The Pink Swastika,” which asserts that “homosexuals the true inventors of Nazism and the guiding force behind many Nazi atrocities?”

Should Catholic deputies be forced to graduate in a church where the head pastor preaches that the rosary is “vain and repetitious” and declares that “God is not impressed with such empty and meaningless prayers”?

When Houston held the graduation at Legacy Church (his own church) rather than in one of the many available public facilities, he sent a message to the community that BCSO favors Legacy’s set of beliefs over all others. The government should not be in the business of deciding which religious beliefs are right, wrong or preferred.

Although Smothermon said he has no regard for the ACLU, the ACLU still has regard for him – just as we have regard for the rights of every American. While we might always not see eye to eye, we would be proud to defend Smothermon and Legacy Church should the government ever interfere with their right to pray, worship and believe as they see fit. But we are equally proud to stand up to the government when it involves Legacy Church in an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. Because that’s what the ACLU does – we defend religious freedom for everyone.

This article was published in the Opinion section of the Monday, December 26, 2011 issue of the Albuquerque Journal.

VIDEO: When Freedom Can’t Defend Itself

 

 

On October 22, the ACLU of New Mexico premiered it’s new video, When Freedom Can’t Defend Itself, at the 49th Annual Bill of Rights Celebration. The video follows the stories of four New Mexicans, a Sikh paramedic, a National Guardsman, a Border Patrol agent and a high school student who all turned to the ACLU of New Mexico when their civil liberties were violated.

 

 

Occupying? Know your rights!

Can my free speech be restricted because of what I say—even if it is controversial?

No. The First Amendment prohibits restrictions based on the content of speech. However, this does not mean that the Constitution completely protects all types of free speech activity in every circumstance. Police and government officials are allowed to place certain nondiscriminatory and narrowly drawn “time, place and manner” restrictions on the exercise of First Amendment rights. Any such restrictions must apply to all speech regardless of its point of view.
 
Where can I engage in free speech activity?
Generally, all types of expression are constitutionally protected in traditional “public forums” such as streets, sidewalks and parks. In addition, your speech activity may be permitted to take place at other public locations that the government has opened up to similar speech activities, such as the plazas in front of government buildings.
What about free speech activity on private property?
The general rule is that the owners of private property may set rules limiting your free speech. If you disobey the property owner’s rules, they can order you off their property (and have you arrested for trespassing if you do not comply).
Do I need a permit before I engage in free speech activity?
Not usually. However, certain types of events require permits. Generally, these events are:
  • A march or parade that does not stay on the sidewalk, and other events that require blocking traffic or street closure
  • A large rally requiring the use of sound amplifying devices; or
  • A rally at certain designated parks or plazas
Many permit procedures require that the application be filed several weeks in advance of the event. However, the First Amendment prohibits such an advance notice requirement from being used to prevent rallies or demonstrations that are rapid responses to unforeseeable and recent events. Also, many permit ordinances give a lot of discretion to the police or city officials to impose conditions on the event, such as the route of a march or the sound levels of amplification equipment. Such restrictions may violate the First Amendment if they are unnecessary for traffic control or public safety, or if they interfere significantly with effective communication with the intended audience. A permit cannot be denied because the event is controversial or will express unpopular views.
Specific problems
If organizers have not obtained a permit, where can a march take place?
If marchers stay on the sidewalks and obey traffic and pedestrian signals, their activity is constitutionally protected even without a permit. Marchers may be required to allow enough space on the sidewalk for normal pedestrian traffic and may not maliciously obstruct or detain passers-by.
May I distribute leaflets and other literature on public sidewalks?
Yes. You may approach pedestrians on public sidewalks with leaflets, newspapers, petitions and solicitations for donations without a permit. Tables may also be set up on sidewalks for these purposes if sufficient room is left for pedestrians to pass. These types of free speech activities are legal as long as entrances to buildings are not blocked and passers-by are not physically and maliciously detained. However, a permit may be required to set up a table.
Do I have a right to picket on public sidewalks?
Yes, and this is also an activity for which a permit is not required. However, picketing must be done in an orderly, non-disruptive fashion so that pedestrians can pass by and entrances to buildings are not blocked.
Can government impose a financial charge on exercising free speech rights?
Some local governments have required a fee as a condition of exercising free speech rights, such as application fees, security deposits for clean-up, or charges to cover overtime police costs. Charges that cover actual administrative costs have been permitted by some courts. However, if the costs are greater because an event is controversial (or a hostile crowd is expected)—such as requiring a large insurance policy—then the courts will not permit it. Also, regulations with financial requirements should include a waiver for groups that cannot afford the charge, so that even grassroots organizations can exercise their free speech rights. Therefore, a group without significant financial resources should not be prevented from engaging in a march simply because it cannot afford the charges the City would like to impose.
Do counter-demonstrators have free speech rights?
Yes. Although counter-demonstrators should not be allowed to physically disrupt the event they are protesting, they do have the right to be present and to voice their displeasure. Police are permitted to keep two antagonistic groups separated but should allow them to be within the general vicinity of one another.
Does it matter if other speech activities have taken place at the same location?
Yes. The government cannot discriminate against activities because of the controversial content of the message. Thus, if you can show that similar events to yours have been permitted in the past (such as a Veterans or Memorial Day parade), then that is an indication that the government is involved in selective enforcement if they are not granting you a permit.
What other types of free speech activity are constitutionally protected?
The First Amendment covers all forms of communication including music, theater, film and dance. The Constitution also protects actions that symbolically express a viewpoint. Examples of these symbolic forms of speech include wearing masks and costumes or holding a candlelight vigil. However, symbolic acts and civil disobedience that involve illegal conduct may be outside the realm of constitutional protections and can sometimes lead to arrest and conviction. Therefore, while sitting in a road may be expressing a political opinion, the act of blocking traffic may lead to criminal punishment.
What should I do if my rights are being violated by a police officer?
It rarely does any good to argue with a street patrol officer. Ask to talk to a supervisor and explain your position to him or her. Point out that you are not disrupting anyone else’s activity and that the First Amendment protects your actions. If you do not obey an officer, you might be arrested and taken from the scene. You should not be convicted if a court concludes that your First Amendment rights have been violated.

Download a pdf copy.

Bernco Commissioner Michael Wiener Told You to Go to Hell…

On Tuesday, September 27,  Bernalillo County Commissioner Michael Wiener told the ACLU to “go to hell.”

No joke. You can watch the video clip for yourself:

I spoke on behalf of the ACLU at the commission meeting on Tuesday in support of a resolution that would prohibit county ceremonies from being held in places of worship. I told the commission that when a government agency holds official ceremonies in places of worship, it sends a message to the community that a certain religious group or set of beliefs is preferred—and that’s just not right.

Unfortunately, I was outnumbered 30 to 1 at the meeting and things got a little ugly. Then Wiener told us to go to hell. Then the commission voted down the resolution 3-2. It was kind of a rough day.

But that’s what the ACLU does, we take principled stands—often in the face of fierce opposition—to insure that our freedoms are not trampled by the tyranny of the majority. Today, I’d like to invite you to stand with the ACLU of New Mexico by letting your commissioners (especially Wiener!) know that the separation of church and state matters to you.

This resolution didn’t come out of the blue. Earlier this month Bernalillo County Sheriff Dan Houston chose his own church as the venue for the graduation ceremony for new deputies. Some of the new deputies were upset that, on their special day, they would be forced to attend a ceremony in a place of worship when plenty of secular, county-owned venues were available.

We want our supporters to speak up on this issue because it is important to show that what happened at that commission meeting was unacceptable. The majority of Americans value the separation of church and state because they know that both government and religion are at their best when they are not entangled with one another.

Sincerely,

Peter Simonson

Executive Director

Support Bernalillo County Commission’s Resolution Banning Use of Religious Buildings for Public Ceremonies

No one should have to feel uncomfortable or out of place because the government chooses to hold a public function in a place of worship. That’s what happened recently when the Bernalillo County Sherriff’s Office decided to hold their new deputys’ graduation ceremony at Legacy Church in Albuquerque.

In response, the Bernalillo County Commission has introduced a resolution requiring that all public ceremonies involving county employees be held in public facilities. This is a great resolution for several reasons:

  1. When a government agency holds a public function at a place of religious worship, they implicitly give their endorsement to that particular religious sect. The government should not be in the business of deciding which beliefs are right, wrong or preferred.
  2. There are plenty of government owned, non-religious community centers, public gathering areas and multipurpose stages that can serve as venues for public ceremonies at no additional cost to the tax-payer. These venues are far more appropriate places to hold public ceremonies involving people who hold a diverse, wide range of religious beliefs.
  3. Holding public ceremonies in places of worship makes the government vulnerable to legal challenges. Using tax-payer money defending against a First Amendment lawsuit when appropriate non-religious alternatives exist is a waste. We can’t afford to spend the County’s limited resources in this way.

Please take the time to write your county commissioners to ask they vote YES on the resolution requiring that all public ceremonies involving county employees be held in public facilities. If you don’t know which commissioner represents your district, you can consult the maps below:

Maggie Hart Stebbins, Chair (District 3): wobrien@bernco.gov (Dist. 3 map)

Art De La Cruz, Vice Chair (District 2): dherrera@bernco.gov (Dist 2 map)

Michelle Lujan Grisham (District 1): BCCDistrict1@bernco.gov (Dist. 1 map)

Michael C. Wiener (District 4): ddady@bernco.gov (Dist 4 Map)

Wayne A. Johnson (District 5): kbrown@bernco.gov (Dist. 5 map)

Upcoming Events
There are no upcoming events at this time.
Quick Vote

Should the federal Department of Justice investigate the Albuquerque Police Department and it's string of shootings?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Featured Sponsor