In Larry Craig’s Corner, the A.C.L.U.

NY Times ^ | 16 January 2008 | Mike Nizza

[shrinkermd]

The man who drew the attention of the St. Paul, Minn., police with his “wide stance” was the victim of a law that is “unconstitutionally overbroad,” the American Civil Liberties Union says. As Senator Larry Craig, Republican of Idaho, pushes to withdraw his guilty plea following his arrest in a public restroom at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, the rights group has strongly backed him in a brief filed with Minnesota Court of Appeals.

According to The Associated Press’s reading of the 12-page document, the A.C.L.U. argues that the police cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the senator was soliciting sex in the airport bathroom without violating privacy rights articulated in a 1970 Minnesota Supreme Court opinion.

[NCWarrior]

I don’t know what the ACLU is arguing, based on the first paragraph. I know what the AP says the ACLU is arguing, but since it doesn’t match the facts of the case, I’m not going to assume the AP managed to get this one right. It’s much more likely the ACLU is arguing that a sexual invitation has an expectation of privacy.. which is fine, as long as it also allows a fist as a valid, legal response.

Dealing with the ACLU is like going to a Minnesota airport bathroom.. you may be there for a reason, but it’s disgusting to know who might be standing next to you. Sen. Craig should refute every statement made in his ‘support’ by the ACLU. Then again, so should’ve Rush.

They just love adopting Republicans/conservatives and sending out ‘helpful’ press releases on their behalf.

[La Enchiladita]

Exactly...:-(

[pepsionice]

Actually...they are only saying that public sex in the Minneapolis airport...is ok. Thats all they’ve said so far. I was thinking...there ought to be a Minneapolis-sign...like two fingers on the nose...to let everyone know that you are urgently in need of a “Senator Craig”...and see what happens.