INFO ON LAWSUIT:

Update on Lawsuit and SAPD
posted Jul 21, 2008

On March 13, the City Council amended the Parade Ordinance, hoping to correct the constitutional violations discussed by Judge Rodriguez. The amendments list seven factors for the SAPD to consider in setting the fees (the march route, the number of participants etc.) and direct the Chief of Police to create a Standard Operating Procedure implementing these factors.  At that point, the lawsuit stalled, waiting for the Chief of Police to issue the Standard Operating Procedure so that we could all see what the fee-setting details would be. Months passed. Finally, Judge Rodriguez set the case for a Status Conference on June 24. On June 23, the Standard Operating Procedure was issued. In court the next day, City Attorney Deborah Klein offered a “computer glitch” as explanation for the delay.  So now things are speeding up. Judge Rodriguez reaffirmed the trial date of November 17, 2008.  On June 27, the City filed a Motion asking the Court to end the injunction on the ground that the amendments and the Standard Operating Procedure correct all unconstitutional aspects of the Parade Ordinance.

We will ask Judge Rodriguez to continue the injunction, arguing that the high fees constitute an insurmountable bar to freedom of speech and assembly, that the frequent waivers constitute unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination, and that the Parade Ordinance is unconstitutionally vague in its definition of “First Amendment Processions” and “Non-First Amendment Processions.”

This is an important struggle.  We must preserve our right to march in the streets! We must protect the public right to open political debate! Join us!  Come to Free Speech Coalition Meetings the 2nd Tuesday of every month at the Esperanza! Write letters to the editor or Op-Ed pieces! Contribute money to the Coalition for litigation expenses! Call 210.228.0201 to get involved! The case will go to trial on November 17, 2008!*

*UPDATE: Trial Date has been rescheduled for January 26, 2009)

DOCUMENTS:
- Click to download in PDF format -

Talking Points:

Talking Points - ENGLISH
Talking Points - ESPAÑOL

Legal Documents:

Motion for Injuction
Supplemental Memorandum
Post-hearing memorandum
City's Post-Hearing brief


Docs from the City
First Amended Complaint

	11/29/2007 Ordinance
	02/21/08 Order
	03/13/08 Amended Ordinance
	06/23/08 Standard Operating Procedure
	IWDMPC & SAFC's Second Amended Complaint
	City's Motion to Dissolve the Injunction
	IWDMPC & SAFSC's Motion for Modification of the Existing Preliminary Injunction or for Entry of a Second Preliminary Injunction
	IWDMPC & SAFSC's Memorandum in Opposition and Support
	City's Reply in Support of Its Motion to Dissolve the Injunction
	City's Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Modification or entry of a Second Preliminary Injunction
	IWDMPC & SAFSC's Reply in Support of Their Motion for Modification or entry of a Second Preliminary Injunction, with
		-- Evidentiary Appendix (Part 1)
		-- Evidentiary Appendix (Part 2)

Results of Hearing on Request for Injunction
posted Fri, Dec 21, 2007

Community overflowed the courtroom of United States District Judge Xavier Rodríguez yesterday morning to fight against the City of San Antonio’s efforts to put a high price tag on Free Speech.  “The streets can be used to promote tourism or to sell Spurs tickets, but not to speak out against the imprisonment of immigrant children, the invasion of Iraq, or the exploitation of women workers – speech is not free in San Antonio!” comments Amanda Haas, a community organizer and activist with the Esperanza Peace & Justice Center.

The International Woman’s Day March & Rally Committee and the San Antonio Free Speech Coalition, a coalition of over 250 individuals and organizations (click here for a list) asked Judge Rodríguez to bar the City from enforcing its new parade ordinance, enacted on November 29, 2007 by the City Council, over courageous opposition by Councilwomen Lourdes Galvan and Mary Alice Cisneros.  In casting her vote against the ordinance, Councilwoman Galvan said “I have heard the testimony of community activists … and in honor of Emma Tenayuca, I will vote against this ordinance.”

Judge Rodríguez heard powerful testimony from five community representatives.  Maria Antonietta Berriozábal  recalled significant street marches over the years: in solidarity with the Selma “Bloody Sunday” Civil Rights March in 1965, in outrage over the murder of a San Antonio youth by a police officer, in support of the rights of women, immigrants, and workers – street marches are the primary forum for community free speech in San Antonio.  Graciela Sánchez testified to the favoritism and arbitrariness in the imposition of costs for street marches by City officials: participation in a nation-wide demonstration in solidarity with the victims of genocide in Darfur would cost between $12,000 and $15,000; the 2006 march for immigrant rights was charged anywhere from $6,000 to $70,000; the International Woman’s Day March was charged $2,500 over ten years ago.  Joleen Garcia recounted her experience in helping to organize the May 1st immigrants’ rights march: even though the City knew that upwards of 18,000 people would march, the City insisted that no street march would be permitted unless organizers paid thousands of dollars.  If you don’t pay, you are on your own.  Lorinda Carr, a veteran disabled by her work at Kelly Air Force base, told the Judge that sidewalk marches are not viable alternatives for physically challenged activists.  Lorinda’s testimony was dramatically illustrated when she had to confront immoveable barriers in her wheelchair’s path to the witness stand and the Judge directed that she “just testify from where you are.”  Nadine Saliba concluded the community’s testimony with information about the special dangers facing the Arab-American community since 9/11, the inquiries she has made regarding street marches, and the conflicts between marchers and pedestrians that are the inevitable consequence of sidewalk marches.

Assistant Chief of Police David Head and Officer William Jenkins testified on behalf of the City, against the background of public statements issued by Mayor Hardberger: “It’s your message, you should have to pay for it!” and Chief of Police William McManus: “the magnitude of controversy could affect [the cost of the march].”   These witnesses confirmed the Plaintiffs’ allegations about the City’s favoritism and arbitrariness: costs are waived for some events because Councilmembers want to support them, because a local constable makes a call to the San Antonio Police Department, or because the Police Department decides to look the other way.

At the end of the three and a half-hour hearing, Judge Rodríguez told participants that he wanted additional arguments from attorneys on both sides, and that he would issue his decision on Plaintiffs’ request for an Injunction before February 8th, in time for the planned International Woman’s Day March on March 8th.  The International Woman’s Day March Committee and the San Antonio Free Speech Coalition will meet again at the Esperanza Peace & Justice Center on February 12, 2008.

Background Information

On November 29, 2007, the Mayor and City Council voted to pass an ordinance that puts a price on free speech.  While the original goal of this ordinance was to streamline the permit and fee process for “Parades, Runs, Walks, and Related Events,” concerns over limitations on our First Amendment rights have become a key point.  Despite many citizens who spoke before the City Council on the issue, only Councilwoman Lourdes Galvan of District 5 and Councilwoman Mary Alice Cisneros of District 1 voted against the ordinance.

Since spring of this year, a community coalition has worked with the City to give feedback on the new ordinance.  While many positive changes to the previous version of the ordinance were made, what passed at City Council remains a blatant violation of free speech. The ordinance threatens community marches by requiring groups to pay for the cost of traffic barriers, police officers, and clean-up for their events, which can amount up to $15,000 or more. In addition, some groups are given exemptions from those costs while others are still required to pay. Such exemptions create the potential for viewpoint discrimination—that is, groups may be exempted from cost based on the political content of their event.

In passing this ordinance, the Mayor and City Council have demonstrated that they do not respect the sanctity of our Constitution.  The U.S. Supreme Court and courts in numerous top-tier cities, including cities in Georgia and Pennsylvania, have repeatedly ruled it unconstitutional for the government to impose such high fees that people are in effect precluded from using the public streets for marches and other such events.  Although the ordinance passed says that the City will pay for the first $3000 of any “First Amendment Activities” on the streets, the remaining costs could still easily prevent free speech marches from occurring.

Even if it is permissible to charge groups the actual cost of using the streets for a march or parade, courts have clearly held that the First Amendment requires “viewpoint neutrality.” That is, if the government decides to waive costs for some marches or parades, it must do so for all, without regard to the views expressed by the event or the event organizers. Thus, it is unconstitutional for the City to subsidize some parades or marches and not others, as the ordinance passed does.

In response, members of the International Woman’s Day March and Rally Committee and the San Antonio Free Speech Coalition marched to the Federal Courthouse immediately following the City Council vote to file a lawsuit challenging this ordinance. Our first hearing on Thursday, December 20th will either grant or deny an injunction that would prvent the City from enforcing or publicizing the ordinance until the lawsuit has been closed.