Gov. Christie Earns Mixed Marks on Civil Liberties During His First Two Years

January 24, 2012

ACLU-NJ examines Christie’s record on respecting rights

NEWARK – The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey (ACLU-NJ) released a midterm report card for Gov. Chris Christie today (182k PDF), issuing mostly low marks for his administration’s handling of critical civil liberties issues such as reproductive freedom and free speech.

The report card examines Christie’s record on an array of civil liberties issues during his first two years in office. The ACLU-NJ issued a similar report card for Newark Mayor Cory Booker (229k PDF) in 2009 during his first term in office.

“Christie has two years to turn a mediocre civil liberties record into a testament to individual rights,” said ACLU-NJ Executive Director Deborah Jacobs. “The people of New Jersey expect a leader who will stand up for their freedoms, not one who will let them know that despite his unfair policies, his heart is in the right place. It’s time for Gov. Christie’s good intentions to turn into policies that strengthen our rights and improve our lives.”

The ACLU-NJ issued the following grades:

• B in Freedom of Religion. Gov. Christie made headlines several times in his first term for defending the religious freedom of Muslims and warning against extremists trying to promote discrimination against Islam.


• F in Freedom of Speech. When provided the opportunity to speak up for our nation’s most fundamental value, the Governor stood idly by, letting the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs trample the rights of Occupy Trenton, and going so far as to endorse the termination of a NJ Transit employee fired for exercising his right to free expression.


• B- in LGBT Rights. Although the Governor has spoken out against bullying and supported some interests of the LGBT community, he has turned his back on marriage equality for same-sex couples.


• D in Open Government. Although the Governor signed a bill that lowers the cost of copies in New Jersey, his administration has put itself on the wrong side of open government disputes numerous times, allowing agencies to hide public documents and forcing citizens to go to court to get them.


• C in Police Practices. Improvements made by the Office of Attorney General (OAG) to its statewide police Internal Affairs policies were a step forward, but the OAG has failed to address other important issues, such as developing a statewide policy on the use of confidential informants.


• C in Privacy Rights. The governor conditionally vetoed a bill that sought to open adoption records, taking into account the privacy rights of birth parents. At the same time, he signed into a law a bill that allows police to collect DNA of people once they have been arrested in violation of privacy and due process rights.


• F in Reproductive Rights. Not only did the governor cut $7.5 million from the budget for family planning centers, but he also withdrew an application for a federal program that would have covered family planning expenses for some of New Jersey’s most vulnerable women and children.


• D in Separation of Powers. The Governor refused to reappoint New Jersey Supreme Court Justice John J. Wallace, Jr., calling into question the tradition of evaluating judges based on merits, and personally attacked a Superior Court judge because he disagreed with the outcome of her ruling. Gov. Christie’s actions threaten to undermine the judiciary’s independence and credibility.

ACLU-NJ Wins Temporary Restraining Order in Favor of Occupy Trenton Protesters

November 07, 2011

NEWARK — A Superior Court judge has validated the free speech rights of Occupy Trenton protesters and has ordered the state to return all of the food, medical supplies, computers and other property that it confiscated on October 14.

ACLU-NJ goes to court to defend Occupy Trenton's free speech

October 27, 2011

State illegally confiscated computers, signs and medicine from protesters

TRENTON – The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey (ACLU-NJ) appeared in the Chancery Division of Mercer County Superior Court yesterday afternoon to stop the State from enforcing unconstitutional rules that violate the free speech rights of the Occupy Trenton protesters. The ACLU-NJ argued that the State illegally confiscated the laptops, coolers and other property belonging to the protesters on October 14 as a means to chill their free speech.

“The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-NJ Legal Director Ed Barocas. “Laws must be created pursuant to proper process, not created by executive fiat.”

The rules at issue were developed and enforced only after protesters first descended on Veterans Park on State Street on Oct. 6 with blankets, laptops, a small generator, coolers of food and tarps for rain. In the past, other groups have been permitted to use tables, canopies and other items that the State has prohibited Occupy Trenton from using.

On Oct. 13, Raymond Zawacki, Deputy Commissioner for Veteran’s Affairs in New Jersey’s Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, issued an edict restricting any camping or picnicking items from the park. The next day, the State Police confiscated most of the protesters’ property, including their computers, coolers, the generator and their protest signs.

During the hearing, ACLU-NJ cooperating attorney Bennet Zurofsky argued the state cannot inhibit speech activities simply because it doesn’t like the aesthetics. Zurofsky also pointed out that picnicking - including with items like coolers and chairs - is just the kind of activity for which parks were designed. The Attorney General’s office argued in court that the State can make up whatever rules it wishes regarding its property and that any “unattended” property should be considered “abandoned.” The State has essentially taken the position that property, including protest signs, is “unattended” if it is not within arm’s length of an individual. Indeed, the State seized protestors’ property despite the fact that the protestors are within a few feet of their items.

The ACLU-NJ asked the court to impose a temporary restraining order to prevent the State from infringing upon the protestors’ fundamental rights. The judge is expected to rule in the next few days.

Related Documents

• Occupy: Brief
• Occupy: Complaint
• DMAVA Letter

ACLU-NJ’s Statement on Union Township School Teacher’s Facebook Post

October 18, 2011

NEWARK — Although we do not agree with the sentiments expressed on Union Township teacher Viki Knox’s personal Facebook page, her beliefs and comments are protected by the First Amendment. But because her postings raise questions about her conduct within school, the school district can and should investigate whether she is performing her job in accordance with school policies and the state's Law Against Discrimination.

Appeals Court Rules Newark Journalist Who was Wrongfully Arrested by Police is Entitled to Damages

July 19, 2011

NEWARK - The United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling today holding that Newark journalist Roberto Lima is entitled to the entire amount of a monetary offer made by the City of Newark in a case stemming from his wrongful arrest in 2007, and that his attorneys are also entitled to now seek fees in addition to those monetary damages.

New Jersey Transit Agrees to Reinstate Worker Fired for Protest Activities

April 18, 2011

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey today announced that it has reached a successful settlement in the case of Derek Fenton, the New Jersey Transit worker who was fired for burning three pages of a Koran during a rally held in protest of a proposed Islamic community center in Lower Manhattan last year.

Newark Police Illegally Detain Honors Student Over Cellphone Footage

March 28, 2011

NEWARK, N.J. — The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey (ACLU-NJ) and the Seton Hall Law School Center for Social Justice (CSJ) filed a lawsuit today against the Newark Police Department for illegally handcuffing and detaining a Newark high school honors student who captured video footage on her cellphone of officers responding to an incident on a New Jersey Transit bus.

ACLU-NJ and City of Newark Reach Agreement on Circus Protest Lawsuit

February 24, 2011

NEWARK, N.J. — As the circus comes to town this week, free speech comes right behind.

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey (ACLU-NJ) and the City of Newark have reached a settlement that vindicates the rights of animal welfare activist Nicholas Botti, who was arrested nearly a year ago, while protesting the treatment of animals by Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus. Botti was standing on a public sidewalk outside of the Prudential Center when he was arrested on March 7, 2010 – the last time the circus was in town.

“Most people don’t know how cruelly the animals are treated, and if people have the right to attend the circus, we should have the right to oppose it,” said Botti. “Looking back, it was futile to tell the police we weren’t breaking any laws, but if my experience means the police don't infringe on the rights of other people for speaking their minds, then it is a victory for both civil rights and animal rights.”

On the day of Botti’s arrest, police officers corralled a group of 7 animal-welfare advocates from the sidewalk in front of the Prudential Center to a distant “protest zone,” where sparse foot traffic exposed fewer people to their signs and literature.

As part of the agreement, the City of Newark will train all police officers and city employees responsible for special event permits in Newark’s free-speech policies every six months. The city has an ordinance that requires a permit for free speech activities only when the number of people reaches 50.

“Any policy can only be as good as its enforcement,” said ACLU-NJ Legal Director Ed Barocas. “Over the years we’ve helped Newark build strong free speech policies, and with new emphasis on teaching those policies, they’ll be even stronger.”

The incident last year unfolded when Botti and another activist moved from the fairly isolated “protest zone” to the intersection of Mulberry Street and Edison Place, diagonally across from the arena, where their signs could be seen more readily. Even though neither Botti nor his sign — which read “This is Ringling Baby Elephant Training” next to an image of a prodded elephant — blocked traffic, police arrested him on charges of obstructing the sidewalk and failing to move when ordered by police.

The city requires a permit only when demonstrations exceed 50 participants — much greater than the number of advocates who joined Botti last year.

“We’re gratified that Newark not only recognized the importance of enforcing its free speech ordinances, but responded quickly to institute it,” said Bennet Zurofsky, the attorney who represented Botti for the ACLU-NJ.

The complaint, captioned Nicholas Botti v. City of Newark, along with the settlement order (454k PDF) and past ACLU-NJ work in Newark regarding free speech, can be read online.

ACLU-NJ Circus Suit Makes Free Speech the Elephant in Room

February 02, 2011

NEWARK, N.J. — The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey’s (ACLU-NJ) has filed suit today against the City of Newark for its unconstitutional arrest of an animal welfare advocate while he was exercising his First Amendment right to protest on a public sidewalk outside of the Prudential Center.

The complaint, filed in Superior Court in Essex County, charges Newark Police violated Nicholas Botti’s rights when they refused to allow him to stand on a public sidewalk with a sign depicting the prodding of an elephant next to the words, “This is Ringling Baby Elephant Training.” Botti, a resident of Atlantic Highlands was arrested on March 7, 2010 when the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus was in town.

“Botti was standing on a public sidewalk, exercising his Constitutionally-protected free speech,” said Bennet Zurofsky, who is representing Botti on behalf of the ACLU-NJ. “He was not blocking the sidewalk, nor was he blocking pedestrian traffic. If he can get arrested for standing on a sidewalk with a sign, what’s to stop Newark Police from arresting anyone else who is doing the same?”

Botti and seven other animal welfare advocates distributed leaflets opposing the treatment of animals by Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus. When they arrived at the center, police corralled them into a designated “protest zone” far from the arena, in an area that saw significantly less pedestrian traffic than the front of the center.

When Botti asked a Newark Police lieutenant what law required the protesters to stand in a protest zone, the officer replied, “My law.”

Although the City of Newark does not have specific written guidelines for political activities in front of stadiums, arenas, or other public venues, it does have an ordinance requiring a permit to hold demonstrations with more than 50 people – a number much greater than the animal welfare activists at the Prudential Center the day of Botti’s arrest.

Botti and another activist moved from the designated zone to the intersection of Mulberry Street and Edison Place diagonally across the street from the arena, where their signs could be seen more readily. When Botti refused to return to the designated zone, police arrested him on charges of obstructing the sidewalk and failing to move when ordered by police, even though neither he nor his sign were blocking traffic.

“Standing on a public sidewalk holding up a sign, irrespective of content, is basic free speech,” said Botti. “The fact that the police arrested me for blocking a sidewalk and didn’t arrest, or even address, the street vendor standing right beside me on the sidewalk shows how unfair it is to single out just the people who speak up as targets.”

The ACLU-NJ has challenged the City of Newark a number of times over impediments to free speech. In 2004, it successfully challenged a city requirement for all groups to get the police chief’s permission before distributing information and to secure a $1 million insurance policy before holding a march. In 2008, the city passed an ordinance ensuring that basic free speech activities would not be subject to the insurance requirement.

The complaint is captioned Nicholas Botti v. City of Newark.

ACLU-NJ Fights to Strengthen Bloggers' Free Press Rights

December 08, 2010

NEWARK — The American Civil Liberties of New Jersey today submitted a brief to the New Jersey Supreme Court seeking to protect the rights of bloggers and independent, non-traditional journalists under the First Amendment and New Jersey Shield Law.

"The reality is that people can gather and disseminate information without being part of a larger media conglomerate," said Rutgers-Newark Law School Vice Dean Ronald Chen, who wrote the friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the ACLU-NJ. "The First Amendment protects the lone leafletter just as it does the large newspaper employee. Thanks to the Internet, today's 'lone leafletter' can now reach a much larger audience than in the past."

The ACLU-NJ's amicus brief seeks clarification (257k PDF) of a decision issued by the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court on April 22, 2010, which narrowly interprets the New Jersey Reporters' Shield Law. In its decision, the lower court improperly limited free-press protections to journalists affiliated with traditional institutional journalism.

The lawsuit, Too Much Media v. Shellee Hale, arose in 2008 when Too Much Media, a Freehold-based software company, sued Washington State resident Shellee Hale claiming that information she disseminated about the company on the Internet was defamatory. Too Much Media sought Hale's confidential sources of information as part of its defamation suit, but Hale invoked the New Jersey Shield Law, which in most instances protects members of the media from the pressure to disclose their confidential sources.

The ACLU-NJ's brief to the New Jersey Supreme Court challenges the Appellate Division's decision to deny Hale protection under the Shield Law based on her lack of affiliation with a traditional media service. The ACLU-NJ argues that the conduct and intent of a person to gather and disseminate information qualifies that person as a journalist, not whether that individual works for a "traditional" media outlet.

"The Shield Law was created to stimulate the free flow of information and serve society's interests to acquire knowledge and hold those in power accountable. It should apply broadly," said ACLU-NJ Legal Director Ed Barocas. "What matters is whether someone acts as a journalist and operates with the intent of a journalist, not whether that person is on a traditional media entity's payroll."

While the ACLU-NJ believes the courts should utilize a broader standard in determining application of the Shield Law's protections, it also agrees that a person who simply makes intermittent comments on a message board or chat forum would not be protected. The organization takes no position and remains neutral on whether the defendant, Hale, has met the standard in this case.

The case is captioned Too Much Media v. Shellee Hale.

Related Content

• Too Much Media - Brief