Re: Another nail in the First Amendment coffin?

William Tinker (wtinker@fcgnetworks.net)
Mon, 1 Nov 1999 21:51:20 -0500


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0010_01BF24B3.3B8CEAA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 It appears that our courts are now becoming breeding places for =
political mal-content.I have had little faith in the judicial system =
since I have been made to witness and be part of my fiancees 13 year =
fight to get her daughter taken away from persons whom preyed on her =
emotions and love for her baby and took the child with out her =
permission.
 Telling her that the state was going to take the child if they did not. =
My fiancee was a naive young woman,and completely trusted these =
persons,because they appeared so concerned.
 The truth was found out after ten years and the statute of limitations =
has expired on kidnapping has expired in N.H........The four people that =
took this child were all in collusion to permanently deprive her of the =
love and affection and comfort of this her only child!
 We have fought from Superior Court,to Probate Court,And finally its on =
appeal to New Hampshire Supreme Court,it has kept us in debt up to our =
eye brows for the past five years,but the constitution says that perents =
have inherent rights to parent,and have a say in their childs up =
bringing,life liberty and pursuit of happiness.
 I can see that these desk jockeys(judgEs)     are capable of dashing =
and smashing our constutional rights in our faces but you have to smile =
and tell them you love them,and appeal that decision too because thats =
the american way of the justice system,if you fight long and hard enough =
you usually can prevail!!!!
 I know that my fiancees problems are not half as bad as the problems of =
 the homeless right now. So I apologize for going off on a tirade but I =
wanted to point out that each court is different and sometimes a change =
of venue is in order to get JUSTICE.
 I will sign off but believe me I know what it is to pan handle for a =
living and to clean Dunkin Donuts,and shovel door ways to get food ...So =
remember this for every time we do a good deed we are enriched =
personally,I feel this way any how if I can help one person in a time of =
conflict or dilema so be it I will .
                                      Bill=20





  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Peace through Reason=20
  To: HPN@aspin.asu.edu=20
  Sent: Monday, November 01, 1999 9:01 PM
  Subject: Another nail in the First Amendment coffin?


  November 1, 1999
  Court Backs Fla. Panhandling Law
  =20
  Filed at 10:25 a.m. EST=20
  By The Associated Press=20

  WASHINGTON (AP) -- Homeless people who say they have a free-speech =
right to beg for handouts at the city beach in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., =
lost a Supreme Court appeal today.=20

  The court, without comment, turned away arguments that said the city's =
panhandling ban is too broad.=20

  A 1993 regulation prohibits ``soliciting, begging or panhandling'' on =
a five-mile strip of Fort Lauderdale's city beach and the sidewalks on =
each side of an adjacent street.=20

  The regulation states that it is intended to ``eliminate nuisance =
activity on the beach and provide patrons with a pleasant environment.'' =


  A group of homeless people challenged the regulation in a federal =
class-action lawsuit, saying it violated the Constitution's First =
Amendment guarantee of free speech.=20

  The city could have imposed a narrower rule that barred only hostile =
or aggressive panhandling, or restricted begging to specific areas of =
the beach, the lawsuit contended.=20

  A federal judge and the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the =
regulation. Governments can restrict expression in public areas to serve =
a legitimate interest as long as they leave open other avenues of =
expression, the appeals court ruled, noting that panhandling still is =
allowed in other parts of Fort Lauderdale.=20

  In the appeal acted on today, the homeless people's lawyers said there =
was no evidence of complaints from tourists or business owners that =
begging had created a nuisance at the beach.=20

  ``This court has never upheld a law completely precluding speech in a =
public forum based upon the bare assertion that the speech is a nuisance =
and that the environment would be more pleasant if the speech were =
banned,'' the appeal said.=20

  The city's lawyers urged the justices to reject the appeal. ``The =
First Amendment does not guarantee the right to communicate one's views =
at all times and places or in any manner that may be desired,'' they =
said.=20

  The case is Smith vs. Fort Lauderdale, 99-377.=20



  ____________________________________________________________


  * Peace Through Reason - http://prop1.org -Convert the War Machines! *
  ____________________________________________________________=20

------=_NextPart_000_0010_01BF24B3.3B8CEAA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
 It appears that our courts are = now becoming=20 breeding places for political mal-content.I have had little faith in the = judicial system since I have been made to witness and be part of my = fiancees 13=20 year fight to get her daughter taken away from persons whom preyed on = her=20 emotions and love for her baby and took the child with out her=20 permission.
 Telling her that the state was = going to take=20 the child if they did not. My fiancee was a naive young woman,and = completely=20 trusted these persons,because they appeared so concerned.
 The truth was found out after ten = years and=20 the statute of limitations has expired on kidnapping has expired in=20 N.H........The four people that took this child were all in collusion to = permanently deprive her of the love and affection and comfort of this = her only=20 child!
 We have fought from Superior = Court,to Probate=20 Court,And finally its on appeal to New Hampshire Supreme Court,it has = kept us in=20 debt up to our eye brows for the past five years,but the constitution = says that=20 perents have inherent rights to parent,and have a say in their childs up = bringing,life liberty and pursuit of happiness.
 I can see that these desk=20 jockeys(judgEs)     are capable of dashing and = smashing our=20 constutional rights in our faces but you have to smile and tell them you = love=20 them,and appeal that decision too because thats the american way of the = justice=20 system,if you fight long and hard enough you usually can=20 prevail!!!!
 I know that my fiancees problems = are not half=20 as bad as the problems of  the homeless right now. So I apologize = for going=20 off on a tirade but I wanted to point out that each court is different = and=20 sometimes a change of venue is in order to get JUSTICE.
 I will sign off but believe me I = know what it=20 is to pan handle for a living and to clean Dunkin Donuts,and shovel door = ways to=20 get food ...So remember this for every time we do a good deed we are = enriched=20 personally,I feel this way any how if I can help one person in a time of = conflict or dilema so be it I will .
          &nbs= p;            = ;            =   =20 Bill
 
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Peace = through=20 Reason
To: HPN@aspin.asu.edu
Sent: Monday, November 01, 1999 = 9:01=20 PM
Subject: Another nail in the = First=20 Amendment coffin?

November 1, 1999
Court Backs Fla.=20 Panhandling Law
 
Filed at = 10:25 a.m.=20 EST
By The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) -- = Homeless people=20 who say they have a free-speech right to beg for handouts at the city = beach in=20 Fort Lauderdale, Fla., lost a Supreme Court appeal today.

The = court,=20 without comment, turned away arguments that said the city's = panhandling ban is=20 too broad.

A 1993 regulation prohibits ``soliciting, begging = or=20 panhandling'' on a five-mile strip of Fort Lauderdale's city beach and = the=20 sidewalks on each side of an adjacent street.

The regulation = states=20 that it is intended to ``eliminate nuisance activity on the beach and = provide=20 patrons with a pleasant environment.''

A group of homeless = people=20 challenged the regulation in a federal class-action lawsuit, saying it = violated the Constitution's First Amendment guarantee of free speech.=20

The city could have imposed a narrower rule that barred only = hostile=20 or aggressive panhandling, or restricted begging to specific areas of = the=20 beach, the lawsuit contended.

A federal judge and the 11th = U.S.=20 Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the regulation. Governments can = restrict=20 expression in public areas to serve a legitimate interest as long as = they=20 leave open other avenues of expression, the appeals court ruled, = noting that=20 panhandling still is allowed in other parts of Fort Lauderdale. =

In the=20 appeal acted on today, the homeless people's lawyers said there was no = evidence of complaints from tourists or business owners that begging = had=20 created a nuisance at the beach.

``This court has never upheld = a law=20 completely precluding speech in a public forum based upon the bare = assertion=20 that the speech is a nuisance and that the environment would be more = pleasant=20 if the speech were banned,'' the appeal said.

The city's = lawyers urged=20 the justices to reject the appeal. ``The First Amendment does not = guarantee=20 the right to communicate one's views at all times and places or in any = manner=20 that may be desired,'' they said.

The case is Smith vs. Fort=20 Lauderdale, 99-377.


=
____________________________________________________________
* Peace Through Reason - http://prop1.org -Convert the War Machines!=20 *
____________________________________________________________=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01BF24B3.3B8CEAA0--