Posted on 01/16/2008 5:05:44 AM PST by IronKros
ST. PAUL, Minn. - In an effort to help Sen. Larry Craig, the American Civil Liberties Union is arguing that people who have sex in public bathrooms have an expectation of privacy.
Craig, of Idaho, is asking the Minnesota Court of Appeals to let him withdraw his guilty plea to disorderly conduct stemming from a bathroom sex sting at the Minneapolis airport.
The ACLU filed a brief Tuesday supporting Craig. It cited a Minnesota Supreme Court ruling 38 years ago that found that people who have sex in closed stalls in public restrooms "have a reasonable expectation of privacy."
That means the state cannot prove Craig was inviting an undercover officer to have sex in public, the ACLU wrote.
The Republican senator was arrested June 11 by an undercover officer who said Craig tapped his feet and swiped his hand under a stall divider in a way that signaled he wanted sex. Craig has denied that, saying his actions were misconstrued.
The ACLU argued that even if Craig was inviting the officer to have sex, his actions wouldn't be illegal.
"The government cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Senator Craig was inviting the undercover officer to engage in anything other than sexual intimacy that would not have called attention to itself in a closed stall in the public restroom," the ACLU wrote in its brief.
The ACLU also noted that Craig was originally charged with interference with privacy, which it said was an admission by the state that people in the bathroom stall expect privacy.
Craig at one point said he would resign but now says he will finish his term, which ends in January 2009.
This is silly...
The ACLU shows its true colors, once again.
Gays, child molesters, commies and traitors. Those are the only people with civil rights in the eyes of the ACLU.
Is this satire?
And some folks wonder why moms bring their little boys into the ladies’ room with them...
ML/NJ
If someone could point out that it is satire, it would make my day.
Stop the world, I want to get off. /s
Gays, child molesters, commies and traitors ARE the ACLU
The ACLU declared war on it.
He didn’t have sex, nor was he PLANNING to have sex, IN THE STALLS. That was simply where the alleged SOLICITATION to have sex took place.
I think the ACLU would have a better shot at arguing that returning a solicitation from someone for sex has an expectation of privacy, rather than arguing that actually putting two people in a stall raises an expectation of privacy.
Hard to make a bumper sticker that includes all 4 of those.
The ACLU has to pick one.
I suggest: Traitors’R’Us.
Since molesting children can be seen as a kind of treason.
Disgusting.
pub·lic /ˈpʌblɪk/
1. of, pertaining to, or affecting a population or a community as a whole: public funds; a public nuisance.
2. done, made, acting, etc., for the community as a whole: public prosecution.
3. open to all persons: a public meeting.
4. of, pertaining to, or being in the service of a community or nation, esp. as a government officer: a public official.
5. maintained at the public expense and under public control: a public library; a public road.
6. generally known: The fact became public.
7. familiar to the public; prominent: public figures.
8. open to the view of all; existing or conducted in public: a public dispute.
9. pertaining or devoted to the welfare or well-being of the community:
Am I missing something here ?????
Defending the right to sex in stalls in public restrooms? Looks like the ACLU has finally found their true calling and cause for being. Such a noble cause, not.
All participants in this are disgusting: Craig, the ACLU, and the undercover cop.
Is there any way we could see a list of exactly WHO donates to the ACLU?
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.