Posted on 11/19/2004 8:20:07 AM PST by JesseHousman
TALLAHASSEE -The state Supreme Court struck down two curfew laws in Southwest Florida, placing others in doubt.
A closely divided Florida Supreme Court struck down two juvenile-curfew laws in Southwest Florida on Thursday, jeopardizing similar ones throughout the state, including one in Miami-Dade County that served as a model for others statewide.
In the 4-3 opinion, the majority of justices said the laws in Tampa and neighboring Pinellas Park were too broad because they targeted minors who committed no other crime than being night owls, and because they criminally punished parents and even shop owners who condoned or couldn't control kids' curfew-breaking.
The 91-page opinion and its dissents concern a number of municipalities in Florida that passed juvenile curfew laws after Miami-Dade's ordinance survived a challenge at the appellate court level in the mid-1990s.
Key West, Miami Beach and Fort Lauderdale have laws similar to those in Miami-Dade, Tampa and Pinellas Park. All have slightly different language but seek the same thing: to keep minors off the streets after 11 p.m. or midnight. The other laws may stay on the books unless challenged.
The American Civil Liberties Union, which sued Miami-Dade in the mid-1990s and brought the lead suit in Pinellas Park, said the laws have a target: young minorities. Two of the three youths who challenged Pinellas Park's restrictions are black.
''There is a radical difference between the well-intentioned and high-sounding words of the ordinance and the way it ends up being enforced on a day-to-day basis -- which is typically against young black men,'' said Howard Simon, the ACLU's executive director in Florida.
In Fort Lauderdale, a law was passed in 1997 but wasn't really used at all, said city police Detective Chuck Sierra.
''It was basically abandoned,'' he said. ``What was problematic for us was where are we going to put them? We would be stuck baby-sitting the child until somebody relieved us.''
SUCCESSFUL DEFENSE
Miami-Dade County Attorney Robert Ginsburg noted the county's success defending the law, but said he would have to wade through Thursday's opinion before commenting. Ginsburg, the Miami-Dade state attorney's office and a Metro-Dade police spokesman declined to say whether the law has been effective or how often it is used.
Key West was a latecomer to the curfew-law craze, passing its ordinance in 2002 as the town gentrified and tried to tone down. But, as in Miami-Dade, police don't appear to use the law often. A spokesman for the Key West Police Department said officers use the ordinance as ''a tool'' to get kids off the streets and usually take them home or have parents pick them up at the police station.
Miami Beach City Attorney Murray Dubbin said the new ruling should have little effect on Miami Beach's enforcement of the county's curfew ordinance. He said the city's law, like the county's, was narrowly tailored and would survive a challenge because it provides civil -- not criminal -- penalties for repeat violators.
Tampa and Pinellas Park provided criminal penalties that ''are possibly the most troubling aspect,'' Justice Peggy A. Quince wrote in the majority opinion.
The justices also seemed troubled with the fact that, in Tampa's law, ''business operators who knowingly permit a juvenile to remain on business premises during curfew hours are also subject to the sanctions.'' Though Miami-Dade and some of the other cities have civil penalties, they still seek to penalize private businesses and parents involved in curfew violations.
POSSIBLE JAIL TIME
In Tampa and Pinellas Park, kids, shopkeepers and parents could be thrown in jail and fined for a first curfew violation. In Miami-Dade, a parent or shopkeeper could only be fined up to $500 starting with a third curfew violation. Kids could be taken to a holding facility.
Miami-Dade's law, passed at the insistence of former Commissioner James Burke in 1994, embodies the tone of alarm sounded in nearly every ordinance: It is ``a matter of fact that Miami-Dade County is facing a mounting crisis caused by increasing crime, including juvenile crime and delinquency which threatens peaceful citizens, residents, and visitors.''
But that determination might not cut it. The justices rapped Tampa's law because officials in that city didn't provide statistical data showing the need for it. Pinellas Park officials did provide the required data.
The lead lawyer in the case, Bruce Howie, said he was encouraged by the opinion. In his case, a white girl identified only as T.M. was cited by Pinellas Park police when she stepped beyond the curb of her friend's home, where she was staying overnight, to talk to some boys in a car at 1 a.m.
''She was there with her mother's permission. So this ordinance interfered with her mother's right as a parent giving consent to her child to stay over and her right to be in the street just talking to some boys,'' Howies said. ``Police have better things to concern themselves with.''
Herald staff writers Jennifer Babson, Nicole White and Samuel P. Nitze contributed to this report.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2004 Herald.com and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. http://www.miami.com
What do you think are legitimate reasons for a teen to be out past 11pm or midnight?
In Duval county if your child is truant, the parent gets arrested. I don't see how anyone can say this practice does not teach kids that they are 'not' responsible for their actions.
Kids shouldn't have a curfew so they expend their extra energy being out late at night and have to sleep in and miss school so their parents can be arrested./sarcasm>
If there's a law saying the kids must keep a curfew then it's every bit of the police's business.
The only folks I can think of that might hang out at a Denny's at 1a.m. are drunks and drug addicts (with a small portion of patrons consisting of adults who work shifts that might have them out at this hour.) Add teens to the mix and then there's a whole lot of other 'not good' things that could happen, which are criminal for either age group.
Philadelphia Police Arrest 11 Christians for ‘Hate Crimes’ at Homosexual ‘Outfest’ 10/13/2004
By Robert Knight
Group is jailed for “ethnic intimidation,” “criminal conspiracy,” several other charges.
Ten adults and a teen-ager who showed up to sing hymns and carry signs peacefully at Philadelphia’s latest homosexual celebration were arrested on Sunday and spent 21 hours in jail.
According to Michael Marcavage, founder of Repent America, which organized the protest, the 11 defendants were charged with three felonies and five misdemeanors, including a “hate crime.” If convicted on all counts, the defendants could face 47 years in prison, he said.....
...Some of the charges may have been dropped since the defendants were released. Philadelphia Police spokeswoman Officer Maria Ibrahim said the current charges were: “criminal conspiracy,” **** “failure to disperse,” “disorderly conduct” and “obstructing a highway.” The District Attorney’s office had not returned a call to Concerned Women for America’s (CWA’s) Culture & Family Institute as of press time.....' http://www.cwfa.org/articles/6522/CFI/family/
OK, so all the BAD KIDS stay home! ;)
The constitutional rights of minors are (by and large) not subject to the whims of adults in society. Again, my copy of the Bill of Rights contains no age disclaimer. And if you read through the Constitution & Bill of Rights, age is only referenced twice (if I remember correctly) -- the age to vote and the age to be President. So it sounds like your real beef is with the Constitution.
Why should a minor have the right to be out in the middle of the night without an adult?
Uhh, because EVERYONE has (or should have) that right, so as long as they are not committing crimes.
Not everyone goes to bed at 10pm, as you apparently do.
And your statement makes it sound like you support curfews for adults as well as minors.
Do you personally have any authority over another? Are you a boss, supervisor, parent, etc.? Do you distrust your own authority?
Parents who can't do something about their kids breaking curfew? Those kind of parents NEED to be punished, along with the errant children.
Children are not recognized as full citizens under the law (which you know already) nor do they have the full rights of an adult.
Usually those clamoring for these things are the ACLU, NAMBLA, and other assorted liberal creeps.
Shouldn't that be up to the parents to determine, rather than the gov't?
Well, if you're fond of picking & choosing what constitutional rights minors should enjoy, maybe we all shouldn't protest too loudly the next time a school infringes on the religious rights of a student.
See how that works?
The debate here is whether thos laws are acceptable in the 1st place. I don't think they are.
The only folks I can think of that might hang out at a Denny's at 1a.m. are drunks and drug addicts (with a small portion of patrons consisting of adults who work shifts that might have them out at this hour.)
Or people coming back from a night on the town. Or night owls, like me. Or people who got hungry late at night.
Anyway, Denny's is free to ban people under a certain age from their restaurants after 11 pm or whatever. Why get the government involved?
BTTT.
The school is infringing on the rights of a parent in that case. See how that works?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.