Deprecated: mb_convert_encoding(): Handling HTML entities via mbstring is deprecated; use htmlspecialchars, htmlentities, or mb_encode_numericentity/mb_decode_numericentity instead in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/super-cool-ad-inserter/inc/scaip-shortcode-inserter.php on line 37
- Photo by Charlie Deitch
- Scenes from the G-20 in Pittsburgh
This morning, the ACLU announced a $400,000 settlement in a case involving 13 people swept up in a mass arrest in Oakland, hours after the G-20 summit ended here in 2009. As is typical in such cases, the city is admitting no wrongdoing.
Is Pittsburgh any freer as a result? It’s not clear.
“This settlement marks an end to the lawsuits filed by people arrested or harassed during the G-20 Summit in Pittsburgh,” ACLU of PA Executive Director Reggie Shuford said in a statement announcing the settlement.
“I hope that this settlement sends the message that there are consequences when a city uses police state tactics,” the statement quotes plaintiff Melissa Hill saying. Hill was covering the conference for Twin Cities Indymedia, and was among those swept up by police on the Cathedral of Learning lawn on the night of Sept. 25, 2009.
The settlement wraps up the last of the major pieces of litigation surrounding the event. A separate $88,000 settlement, involving 11 other ACLU plaintiffs rounded up by police, was reached a year ago. Combined with settlements in other ACLU litigation, the city has paid out $800,000.
But the city was carrying $10 million in insurance to cover the cost of such suits. Cynics may suspect that what these lawsuits have shown is not the sacredness of the Constitution, but of a good insurance policy.
One of the most lasting impacts of the case, in fact, may be the steps city officials took to preserve its coverage. When the city’s Citizen Police Review Board, which investigates claims of police misconduct, requested documents pertaining to the G-20, the board was stymied — apparently over concern that the material could be used by plaintiffs, jeopardizing the city’s policy. The review board lost an ensuing legal battle over whether it should have access to unredacted internal police reports.
The absence of such reports “leaves us against the wall” in terms of figuring out what happened, says Beth Pittinger, the review board’s executive director.
ACLU attorney Sara Rose says that her side took over 100 depositions related to G-20 matters: “We did have a chance to ask a lot of the questions,” she says. “But I’m not sure that we got a lot of satisfactory answers in terms of why this happened.”
“I think a lot of people will say, ‘Will this change anything?'” Rose says. “But ultimately it’s important to make sure the First amendment is protected. The cities that host these events have an obligation to protect both the diplomats and the demonstrators.”
What’s more, she says, “We saw this case as being about making sure the plaintiffs were vindicated.” Though many of those swept up by police argued they were innocent bystanders, “they spent the night in jail, many having never been arrested before. We didn’t see this case as a chance for a change of policy: We’ve worked with the city for years in terms of crafting ordinances and practices, and we think their policies [about protecting the First Amendment] is pretty good. The problem is that during the G-20, all of that went out the window.”
This article appears in Feb 13-19, 2013.
I was there. They announced for over an hour that if you did not disperse that you would be arrested. These 13 people consciously decided that they would rather be arrested than leave they area as they were told, and now they get to collect $30,000 each because they broke a lawful order given by the police.
Did they have a “right” to be there? No.
Why?
Because the 1st Amendment, ratified in the “Bill of Rights” was passed in 1791. It says:
“Congress shall make no law ..abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The very following year (1972), the VERY SAME CONGRESS wrote and passed the “Riot Act” which:
“grants power to the President (executive branch) to issue a proclamation “commanding insurgents to disperse and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within a set period of time”
In order to carry out this order, the VERY SAME CONGRESS who gave us the 1st Amendment and “right to assemble” wrote this law authorizing the legal use of force to disperse a crowd and take take people to jail when they refuse to obey. Further, the Pittsburgh G20 protesters were NOT petitioning the U.S. Government (as required in claiming to have a “right to assemble” clause under the 1st Amendment), and they have now stood up in court to specifically deny that they were attempting to “redress a grievances” (i.e. – “protesting” again as required under the 1st Amendment). How can they now claim any protection for not leaving under the 1st Amendment?
Think about it.. The President of the United States and the heads of the 20 most powerful nations on Earth ALSO have a right to peaceably assemble and a right and obligation to address economic matters. World leaders have a right to sit down in peace and discuss world affairs. They also have a right to be protected from mobs, insurgencies, and people hiding behind masks in disorderly crowds because they potentially pose a very credible and serious threat to their lives, safety, and security of the most important men in the world. Can you imagine if any person or nation actually wanted to decapitate the leadership of the world? How could anyone possibly protect them if the police are denied a right or ability to control a crowd?
IF you love your country, and you love our President, why on Earth would you want to deny HIM his legal right to personal security and his right to peaceably assemble?
It’s unthinkable that this nation has devolved so completely that morons with months of advanced warning, who literally ignore hundreds of police warnings, and actively decided to defy a lawful order given by the police will now be paid $30,000 each for willingly breaking the law and threaten the safety of our President and 20 of the most important people on Earth. But here you have it.
I was one of the 13 people and I was not there for even two minutes before being arrested. The president and these 20 important people had left pittsburgh hours ago because the g 20 had been concluded earlier that day. Get your facts straight.
Jason Munley