Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Second federal suit filed over protests near Bush ranch
Houston Chronicle .com ^ | 9/08/03

Posted on 09/08/2003 5:16:11 PM PDT by Libloather

Second federal suit filed over protests near Bush ranch
Associated Press
Sept. 8, 2003, 5:02PM

AUSTIN -- Three activists sued the city of Crawford today, claiming a city ordinance illegally barred them from protesting the war in Iraq when President Bush was visiting his ranch in May.

The federal lawsuit filed by Marie Pugh of Caddo Mills, Victoria Rectenwald of Waco and Martin Wallace of Denton claims they were threatened with arrest if they violated the city's protest ordinance during Bush's May 3 visit to the ranch.

They said the ordinance violated their First Amendment rights and the Texas Bill of Rights.

The ordinance requires would-be demonstrators to apply for a permit 15 days in advance. They also must state the purpose of the march and the number of people and kinds of material that will be involved, according to the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Austin.

The three had not filed for a permit, which would have been issued by the Crawford police chief. They said they were unaware of the ordinance.

The suit names the Texas Department of Public Safety, the city of Crawford, Crawford Police Chief Donnie Tidmore, McLennan County Sheriff Larry Lynch, and McLennan County Chief Deputy Sheriff Randy Plemons as defendants.

A spokesman with the DPS would not comment on the suit, citing pending litigation. Crawford police and the McClennan County Sheriff's Department did not immediately return calls seeking comment to The Associated Press.

Pugh, Rectenwald and Wallace said they were on their way to demonstrate against the war in Iraq at the Bush ranch and were threatened with arrest by Tidmore as they drove through Crawford.

About 20 DPS officers and a number of sheriff's deputies barricaded the road to prevent them from passing, according to the lawsuit.

Rather than being arrested, the three left. Five other protesters who were arrested in the incident and spent the night in jail filed a separate lawsuit in June. The status of that lawsuit is pending the resolution of criminal charges against the five.

Jim Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, called the ordinance "un-American, anti-democratic and unconstitutional."

"The Crawford ordinance illegally curbs constitutionally protected expression of political views," Harrington said. "The ordinance gives unfettered discretion to the police chief to decide who can and cannot protest and impermissibly discriminates on the basis of the content of the speech."


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: bush; crawford; federal; filed; protests; ranch; second; suit; texas
...a city ordinance illegally barred them from protesting the war...

Maybe they should've followed the big Texas RATS and protested in New Mexico...

1 posted on 09/08/2003 5:16:12 PM PDT by Libloather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Permits are required in most cities.

This suit has little chance of suceeding.
2 posted on 09/08/2003 6:31:04 PM PDT by ImphClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
OOOOh c,mon now. Haven't these people ever heard of sky writing? their 1st amendment rights violated, not. no one stopped them from shouting stupid slogans, just not at the Bush ranch
3 posted on 09/08/2003 6:59:55 PM PDT by South Dakota (Just so you know, I'm saddened that daschle and McGovern are from my state)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton
This suit has little chance of suceeding.

Then that would be a shame. How many Freepers protested Clinton at close range? What is good for the goose...

4 posted on 09/08/2003 7:03:21 PM PDT by Glenn (What were you thinking, Al?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Hmmmm......Outspoken pacifists in TX.........

Doesn't sound like a formula for a long and prosperous life.

Not saying Texans are bloodthirsty savages or anything just that if you annoy them long enough they tend to find a way to shut you up................

5 posted on 09/08/2003 8:05:02 PM PDT by festus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Glenn; MrConfettiMan
How many Freepers protested Clinton at close range?

If memory serves me correctly, all permits were applied for and approved...

6 posted on 09/08/2003 8:10:45 PM PDT by Libloather (If Hillary says something, it must be true...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Libloather; Glenn; kristinn; Angelwood
If memory serves me correctly, all permits were applied for and approved...

Actually, in the early days (think late '98, early '99) I didn't apply for permits. You don't need a permit to protest in Washington, DC, if your group is less than 24 people. Sadly, most (all?) of our protests didn't meet that requirement so strictly speaking we didn't need a permit. However, once we protested the White House Correspondent's Dinner in May 1999 we estimated were going to have about 40 people there and I went ahead and got a permit. Once we learned the procedure for obtaining a permit (and how simple it was) we started more or less doing it every time for the remainder of 1999. Kristinn and Angelwood have been obtaining permits for every event ever since.

7 posted on 09/09/2003 5:23:11 AM PDT by MrConfettiMan ("A submissive sheep is a find for a wolf." - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Libloather; Glenn
Pugh, Rectenwald and Wallace said they were on their way to demonstrate against the war in Iraq at the Bush ranch and were threatened with arrest by Tidmore as they drove through Crawford.

About 20 DPS officers and a number of sheriff's deputies barricaded the road to prevent them from passing, according to the lawsuit.

Okay, my previous reply was written before I had read the article associated with this thread. I'm not sure we're getting the full story because if memory serves the Houston Chronicle is somewhat biased to the left. Based on the above two statements it appears the protestors posed a security threat, which is most likely why they were turned way. I'm sure the Bush ranch has some sort of "perimeter" around it that citizens aren't allowed to cross. Just a guess. In times of heightened security in DC, the DC Chapter couldn't get within ten feet of the White House. However, your point is well taken, Glenn, and they were told the reason they were being turned away was due to their lack of a permit. But if the law requires a permit...but it stills seem a tad extreme to me. I agree with you.

8 posted on 09/09/2003 5:34:40 AM PDT by MrConfettiMan ("A submissive sheep is a find for a wolf." - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Glenn
Are you a lawyer?
9 posted on 09/09/2003 5:44:57 AM PDT by sausageseller
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson