Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Supreme Court Allows Suit Over Arrest Said to Be Politically Motivated
Supreme Court Allows Suit Over Arrest Said to Be Politically Motivated
Sylvia Gonzalez, a Texas city councilwoman, said officials violated the First Amendment by arresting her after she criticized the city manager.
By Adam Liptak
Reporting from Washington
June 20, 2024
A former Texas city councilwoman may pursue a lawsuit claiming that officials had abused their power by arresting her in retaliation for exercising her First Amendment rights, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.
The court’s five-page opinion was unsigned, which is unusual in argued cases. Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. issued a 16-page concurring opinion, writing only for himself. Its length, structure and tone suggested that he had been assigned the majority opinion, but that it had failed to garner the required five votes.
Three other justices wrote or joined concurring opinions. Only Justice Clarence Thomas issued a dissent.
The unsigned opinion said an appeals court had taken “an overly cramped view” of the evidence required to prove a retaliatory arrest. The appeals court should have considered, the opinion said, objective evidence presented by the councilwoman, Sylvia Gonzalez, that the criminal law under which she had been charged had never been used in the county in similar circumstances.
{snip}
Sylvia Gonzalez, a Texas city councilwoman, said officials violated the First Amendment by arresting her after she criticized the city manager.
By Adam Liptak
Reporting from Washington
June 20, 2024
A former Texas city councilwoman may pursue a lawsuit claiming that officials had abused their power by arresting her in retaliation for exercising her First Amendment rights, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.
The court’s five-page opinion was unsigned, which is unusual in argued cases. Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. issued a 16-page concurring opinion, writing only for himself. Its length, structure and tone suggested that he had been assigned the majority opinion, but that it had failed to garner the required five votes.
Three other justices wrote or joined concurring opinions. Only Justice Clarence Thomas issued a dissent.
The unsigned opinion said an appeals court had taken “an overly cramped view” of the evidence required to prove a retaliatory arrest. The appeals court should have considered, the opinion said, objective evidence presented by the councilwoman, Sylvia Gonzalez, that the criminal law under which she had been charged had never been used in the county in similar circumstances.
{snip}