News & Commentary

As one of the most powerful pieces of legislation passed each session, the budget has the opportunity to make wide, sweeping changes to vast sections of Rhode Island law. Because of the extensive nature of the budget, the ACLU has to be particularly vigilant in monitoring the proposed Articles.

In a case raising important First Amendment issues for the Internet age, the ACLU of Rhode Island has taken on the defense of a Massachusetts blogger who was ordered by a Rhode Island Superior Court judge to “immediately remove” from his website “any and all posts, blogs, and comments” regarding a person who sued him for libel, without even hearing from the internet publisher.  Considering the court order a classic example of censorship, ACLU of Rhode Island cooperating attorney Lynette Labinger has removed the case to federal court for adjudication.

Last week we focused on bills which have passed either the House or Senate and could pose serious harm to civil liberties in Rhode Island. Positively, however, numerous bills making advances for the protection of LGBTQ rights and women’s rights have also passed out of each chamber.

A recently-filed ACLU class-action lawsuit challenging the government’s practice of denying due process to detained immigrants could directly affect the continued jailing of some of the immigrant detainees now being held at the Wyatt Detention Center in Central Falls.

The ACLU has asked the R.I. Supreme Court to overturn a Superior Court ruling that upheld the constitutionality of a problematic Providence housing ordinance that prohibits more than three “college students” from living together in certain housing in some areas of the city.  In her February 2018 decision, Superior Court Judge Maureen Keough acknowledged “strong reservations concerning the effectiveness” of the ordinance and agreed it “seems nonsensical,” but ultimately ruled against the students and found the ordinance constitutional. However, in a brief filed with the Supreme Court this week, ACLU attorneys argue that the ordinance unconstitutionally “relegates anyone enrolled in college or graduate school to the status of second-class citizen within the City of Providence.”

As the legislative session approaches its final month, the number of bills being voted out of committee, onto the floor, and recommended to the opposite chamber has grown exponentially. Unfortunately, some of these bills contain provisions which violate civil liberties principles.

The ACLU of Rhode Island today announced a major development in its R.I. Supreme Court appeal on behalf of former House Minority Leader Patricia Morgan, whose access to documents pertaining to former Attorney General (AG) Peter Kilmartin’s expenditure of more than $50M in funds from the “Google settlement” was stymied by thousands of questionable redactions that he made in response to her Access to Public Records Act request.

In a case with major implications for the medical privacy rights of Rhode Islanders, the ACLU of Rhode Island has today joined with the National ACLU, four other ACLU Affiliates, and the New Hampshire Medical Society in filing a “friend of the court” brief arguing that law enforcement agents need a judicial warrant in order to obtain information from state prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) databases.

The passage of out of committee this week of a bill (S 138) which would reinstate a previously repealed statute governing the licensing of medical lab professionals highlighted the way that discriminatory employment patterns are reinforced by actions from the General Assembly. Oftentimes, seemingly innocuous occupational licensing bills have provisions that include expansive and vague language which could render individuals with a criminal background – no matter what crimes they have been convicted of or how long ago their conviction was – unable to procure a license, and hence employment. Such is the case with S 138, which (along with its companion bill H 5367) would resurrect a provision allowing for the denial or suspension of a laboratory professional license for a conviction of any felony or of any misdemeanor for which an “essential element is dishonesty.”