March 9, 2006
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT:
media@aclu.org ST.
PAUL -- The American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota today warned a joint
meeting of the Senate Crime Prevention and Public Safety Committees that the
popular push to ban protests at military funerals may actually end up causing
the state to finance future protests by the followers of anti-gay activist Fred
Phelps.
While the ACLU said it has no current intention to
challenge the law should it be enacted, history proves that a challenge will
arise -- most likely by Phelps himself -- and with solid legal footing, the
amount the state would be forced to pay in attorneys fees would help fund his
organization for a long time to come.
“Public opinion
overwhelmingly rejects the type of conduct that has been undertaken by Phelps
and his followers, and in an election year, the draw to such a popular and
uncontroversial topic is clear,” said Chuck Samuelson, Executive Director of the
ACLU of Minnesota. “However, speech that is cruel, distasteful and
upsetting is still protected by the First Amendment, and by leaving the state on
precarious legal footing, what this bill is doing is encouraging Phelps to sue,
and have the state help fund his operations.”
Phelps and his
followers have gained national notoriety for picketing at the funerals of U.S.
soldiers, gays and people who have died from AIDS, claiming that God is
punishing the United States for supporting homosexuality.
According
to the ACLU, the bill would have unintended consequences for other types of
protests as well. Protesters who unknowingly organize along a funeral
procession route, be they striking workers or abortion protesters, would also
have to be either arrested, or banned from picketing, despite having nothing to
do with the funeral. However, the ACLU warned that changing the bill to
specify the types of protests that are permissible would only further decrease
the constitutionality of the new law.
“The Minnesota law
enforcement community currently has plenty of options for dealing with
disruption of the peace, and through active enforcement of existing laws, the
state’s intended goal could be reached without weakening the civil liberties of
Minnesotans and potentially funding this radical hate group,” Samuelson
said.
