Tom Morello: Riffs and Resistance

AUSTIN, Texas – Travis County signed a settlement agreement last Friday that ensures every person arrested and facing incarceration in the county is provided with an attorney at their first criminal court appearance. The executed settlement agreement will resolve a federal class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas last year on behalf of people jailed in Travis County without access to counsel. The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, ACLU and Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP filed the lawsuit in April 2024. “This settlement agreement ensures that everyone arrested and facing jail time in Travis County will now have a lawyer when they first appear in front of a judge, regardless of their ability to afford one,” said Savannah Kumar (she/they), staff attorney at the ACLU of Texas. “This is both a constitutional right and a matter of basic dignity. People who cannot afford to purchase their freedom by posting bail often face the devastating consequences of losing their jobs, housing, and custody of their children. Now, people who are arrested will have a lawyer by their side to advocate for fair release conditions and preserve their rights.” For years, people in Travis County who could not afford a lawyer were required to attend their first appearance in court without legal representation. At these critical hearings, magistrate judges frequently asked questions about facts related to their alleged crimes, such as relationships with witnesses and other details that could later jeopardize people’s cases. Without an attorney present, individuals were left to navigate this precarious, high-stakes, and unfamiliar legal process on their own. “This agreement affirms what the Constitution has always required: No one should stand alone before a judge when their liberty is at stake without a lawyer by their side,” said Brandon Buskey (he/him), director of the ACLU’s Criminal Law Reform Project. “Guaranteeing counsel at first appearance upholds the core values of due process and fairness that define our justice system. For our plaintiffs, and every person who enters a Travis County courtroom in the future, this settlement ensure that justice will no longer depend on whether someone can afford a lawyer.” The ACLU has previously secured court orders requiring counsel at first appearance in Galveston County, Texas, and Alamance County, North Carolina; and has asserted similar arguments in litigation pending in Oklahoma, Oregon, and Utah. “Today’s signed settlement agreement is a major victory for our community,” said Alfredo Reyes Jr (he/they), an organizer at VOCAL-TX GROW. “People won’t be left to suffer in jail for weeks or months like I have, simply because they didn’t have an attorney. I’m grateful that others will now have a real chance to stay stable — keeping their housing, their health care, and their lives on track instead of languishing in jail. We’re thankful to everyone who worked so hard to make this happen.” The signing comes after the Travis County Commissioners Court voted unanimously to approve the settlement in November. See the ACLU's Travis County court watching report and the problems experienced for people who did not have legal representation here: https://www.aclutx.org/app/uploads/2024/04/aclutx_-_detention_hearings_without_lawyers.pdf Access the settlement agreement here: https://www.aclutx.org/app/uploads/2025/12/Fully-Executed-CAFA_FINAL-Settlement-Agreement-Counsel-at-Magistration-in-Travis-County_Texas1317260.1.pdf

WASHINGTON – President Trump announced today that he will direct executive agencies to reclassify marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under federal law, recognizing that marijuana has accepted medical uses and a lower potential for dependence. Marijuana is currently classified alongside substances such as heroin, and rescheduling would instead place it alongside medications like Tylenol with codeine. The announcement follows years of advocacy directed at many administrations, expanding scientific research, and widespread state-level reforms. “Today’s announcement is a significant step toward aligning federal marijuana policy with science, evidence, and the realities on the ground in states across the country,” said Nina Patel, senior policy counsel at the ACLU. “Congress must now pass the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act and the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act (MORE Act) to ensure justice for the people and communities harmed by the war on drugs. These federal bills would remove federal criminal penalties for marijuana, provide criminal history record clearing, and necessary investments in communities disproportionately targeted for criminalization. The ACLU will continue the fight to end unjust and punitive drug polices for everyone and the creation of a more perfect union for all.”

PHOENIX – Maricopa County filed a motion yesterday to prematurely end court-ordered reforms in Ortega Melendres v. Sheridan, a class action lawsuit that found MCSO engaged in racially discriminatory policing practices and immigration enforcement in Arizona. The move follows a court-ordered budget report which found that MCSO improperly attributed tens of millions of spent taxpayer dollars to this case. In addition to the widespread misuse of county funds, MCSO has failed to fully achieve court-ordered reforms, including reducing or eliminating racial disparities in traffic stops and investigating allegations of deputy misconduct. “Maricopa County’s move to prematurely halt reforms in Melendres ignores the enduring harm Latino residents have experienced at the hands of MCSO,” said Victoria Lopez, executive director for the ACLU of Arizona. “This case is about ensuring meaningful, lasting reform, not settling for temporary fixes. Ending oversight now jeopardizes the progress made thus far and is a distraction from working towards total compliance.” “The County’s effort to end reforms now is like a doctor choosing to end treatment when a patient’s cancer is only partially cured.” Jenn Rolnick Borchetta, deputy director of the ACLU’s Criminal Law Reform Project. “The people of Maricopa County are entitled to complete reform and protection against a return of the Arpaio days, and the County has not yet delivered.”

This case asks whether the stop, search, and arrest of an individual after a traffic stop was unconstitutional under the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights. The case arises from a remarkable set of facts: although motivated by a desire to search Mr. Arias’s car for drugs, the police initiated the stop based on a day-old alleged traffic infraction and then arrested Mr. Arias for allegedly neglecting to stop his car immediately when the police initiated the stop. The ACLU joined an amicus brief authored by the ACLU of Massachusetts and the law firm Proskauer Rose, which argues that the police actions in this case were unconstitutional for three reasons. First, pretextual traffic stops, such as this one, violate the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights. Second, arrests for misdemeanors not involving breaches of the peace also violate the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights. Third, the statute prohibiting drivers from neglecting to stop is unconstitutionally vague as applied to this case.