News & Commentary

Michelle Langlois can use the Internet again to speak about her brother’s court case.

In a case raising important issues of freedom of speech, the Rhode Island ACLU has intervened in Family Court on behalf of a Barrington woman who has been barred by the Court from posting on the Internet any details about a pending Family Court custody proceeding in which her brother is involved. In a motion filed with the Court, RI ACLU volunteer attorney H. Jefferson Melish calls the ban a violation of Michelle Langlois’ First Amendment rights. The motion also argues that the Family Court had no jurisdiction to issue the order because the proceeding was filed in Kent County, even though neither party lives in that county.

Saying that the documents could “chill some individuals from engaging in peaceful protest activities,” the RI ACLU today called on Providence Mayor David Cicilline to remove from the City’s website a “protester registration form” and “public viewing guidelines” in anticipation of expected protests during the U.S. Conference of Mayors being held downtown this weekend.

The Rhode Island ACLU has filed a “friend of the court” brief in the R.I. Supreme Court in the appeal addressing ethics charges against former state Senator William Irons. The brief challenges the Ethics Commission’s position that adoption of the constitutional amendment establishing the Commission effectively repealed the Constitution’s so-called “speech in debate clause” that provides immunity to state legislators for certain legislative actions. The ACLU brief called the Commission’s argument “a launch down a slippery slope of eroding the civil liberties of all Rhode Islanders who come before the Ethics Commission, not just Mr. Irons.”

The RI ACLU testified yesterday against a Senate bill to set up a government-appointed council to “provide oversight” of youth sports organizations in the state, including the power to impose fines against coaches, players, parents or officials in response to complaints the council receives arising from youth sporting events. The RI ACLU called such government involvement “unnecessary and inappropriate.” 

Ruling in a case brought by the Rhode Island ACLU, a federal court has ruled unconstitutional a state law and regulations that allow billboard signs on buildings near highways only if the sign promotes an activity taking place on the property. The suit was on behalf of Anthony Joseph Vono and his business, Specialty Promotions, which was cited in 2005 by the R.I. Department of Transportation for having a billboard sign that advertised “off premises activity.” In supporting Vono’s First Amendment rights, U.S. District Judge William Smith found that the challenged state policies unconstitutionally gave greater protection to commercial speech than to political speech.

The Rhode Island ACLU today announced the favorable settlement of its lawsuit against the state and the Town of Richmond on behalf of Rhode Island Representative-Elect Rod Driver, whose political signs were repeatedly removed by town officials during a campaign for office in 2006.

In response to a Rhode Island ACLU lawsuit filed last week, U.S. District Judge Ernest Torres this morning entered a temporary restraining order (TRO) against enforcement of the Town of West Warwick’s political sign ordinance. The ordinance had been challenged by ACLU volunteer attorney Richard A. Sinapi on behalf of town resident and state legislative candidate Thomas K. Jones.

The Rhode Island ACLU today filed a federal lawsuit against the Town of West Warwick, challenging its discriminatory enforcement of an ordinance that significantly limits the posting of political signs in the town. The suit was filed by ACLU volunteer attorney Richard A. Sinapi on behalf of town resident Thomas K. Jones, who is both a state legislative candidate and an outspoken critic of plans to develop a water park in the town. The suit argues not only that the ordinance violates Jones’ freedom of speech, but also that it has been enforced against him by town officials in a discriminatory manner. Although signs that he has displayed have been cited for violating the ordinance, dozens of other political signs supporting other candidates have not been cited at all.