WASHINGTON — Political protesters had a good day at the Supreme Court Tuesday. Violent protesters did not.
Faced for the second time in six years by a Florida man whose floating home they ruled was illegally seized and destroyed by local officials, the justices appeared to find even less justification for his arrest while speaking at a city council meeting.
That would be strike two for the city of Riviera Beach — and the justices didn't seem eager to wait for strike three.
"Obviously, there is no love lost between your client and the city of Riviera Beach," Justice Samuel Alito told Pamela Karlan, the attorney representing Fane Lozman, whose arrest in 2006 and floating home seizure in 2009 led to both Supreme Court cases.
Lozman's latest battle with his adopted hometown began 12 years ago, when the city sought by eminent domain to redevelop its marina. Over the course of the next three years, he was evicted, returned, and ultimately had his floating home seized and destroyed. Lozman won that Supreme Court case in 2013.
During the course of that battle, officials had him arrested during a City Council meeting when he refused to stop speaking. Unfortunately for them, the incident is preserved on YouTube.
"I found the video pretty chilling," Chief Justice John Roberts said. "I mean, the fellow is up there for about 15 seconds, and the next thing he knows, he's being led off in handcuffs."
Lozman, 56, listened intently from the middle of the courtroom for what seemed likely to be his second successful trip to the high court.
More: Supreme Court allows indefinite immigrant detentions
More: Supreme Court looks to Congress to settle U.S.-Microsoft data dispute
More: Public employee union fees raise ire at Supreme Court, but key justice remains silent on direction
The central issue in the case is whether a finding of probable cause can overcome an arrest carried out in retaliation. While Lozman was charged initially with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, those charges were dropped, and the city's lawyers offered a different reason for his arrest at trial.
While nearly all the justices found little basis for Lozman's treatment, they worried that a ruling in Lozman's favor could cause problems for police who make more justifiable arrests — for felonies, say, or during riots. That point was seized upon by U.S. Deputy Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall.
"There are 10 to 11 million arrests each year and little way to protect them from claims of retaliation," Wall said. While conceding that Riviera Beach's actions were "troubling," he said, "police aren't lawyers. They arrest based on conduct."
But Karlan warned the court that if it allowed Lozman's arrest, "you are giving a green light to every vengeful city council in America to go after people when they demonstrate against abortion clinics, when they demonstrate about police, when they protest zoning decisions."
Several justices said a ruling against the city must be narrow enough that it doesn't give anyone arrested a better chance to claim retaliation.
"I think you have a very strong case," Justice Anthony Kennedy told Karlan, co-director of Stanford Law School's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic. The problem, he said, is walling off legitimate police actions to "confine it in any way."
link to USA Today story »
USA Today: Supreme Court defends free speech of Florida agitator Fane Lozman in his fight against city
February 27, 2018
Comments are off
WASHINGTON — Political protesters had a good day at the Supreme Court Tuesday. Violent protesters did not.
Faced for the second time in six years by a Florida man whose floating home they ruled was illegally seized and destroyed by local officials, the justices appeared to find even less justification for his arrest while speaking at a city council meeting.
That would be strike two for the city of Riviera Beach — and the justices didn't seem eager to wait for strike three.
"Obviously, there is no love lost between your client and the city of Riviera Beach," Justice Samuel Alito told Pamela Karlan, the attorney representing Fane Lozman, whose arrest in 2006 and floating home seizure in 2009 led to both Supreme Court cases.
Lozman's latest battle with his adopted hometown began 12 years ago, when the city sought by eminent domain to redevelop its marina. Over the course of the next three years, he was evicted, returned, and ultimately had his floating home seized and destroyed. Lozman won that Supreme Court case in 2013.
During the course of that battle, officials had him arrested during a City Council meeting when he refused to stop speaking. Unfortunately for them, the incident is preserved on YouTube.
"I found the video pretty chilling," Chief Justice John Roberts said. "I mean, the fellow is up there for about 15 seconds, and the next thing he knows, he's being led off in handcuffs."
Lozman, 56, listened intently from the middle of the courtroom for what seemed likely to be his second successful trip to the high court.
More: Supreme Court allows indefinite immigrant detentions
More: Supreme Court looks to Congress to settle U.S.-Microsoft data dispute
More: Public employee union fees raise ire at Supreme Court, but key justice remains silent on direction
The central issue in the case is whether a finding of probable cause can overcome an arrest carried out in retaliation. While Lozman was charged initially with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, those charges were dropped, and the city's lawyers offered a different reason for his arrest at trial.
While nearly all the justices found little basis for Lozman's treatment, they worried that a ruling in Lozman's favor could cause problems for police who make more justifiable arrests — for felonies, say, or during riots. That point was seized upon by U.S. Deputy Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall.
"There are 10 to 11 million arrests each year and little way to protect them from claims of retaliation," Wall said. While conceding that Riviera Beach's actions were "troubling," he said, "police aren't lawyers. They arrest based on conduct."
But Karlan warned the court that if it allowed Lozman's arrest, "you are giving a green light to every vengeful city council in America to go after people when they demonstrate against abortion clinics, when they demonstrate about police, when they protest zoning decisions."
Several justices said a ruling against the city must be narrow enough that it doesn't give anyone arrested a better chance to claim retaliation.
"I think you have a very strong case," Justice Anthony Kennedy told Karlan, co-director of Stanford Law School's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic. The problem, he said, is walling off legitimate police actions to "confine it in any way."
link to USA Today story »
Recent News
The Fane Lozman Story
This is a true story of a persistent and tenacious underdog who fought against the governmental seizure of 2200 homes and businesses in 2006 only to see that same government arrest and destroy his floating home three years later, for an alleged failure to pay one month’s rent at the marina. Fane Lozman did not give up but continued the improbable climb from a county court eviction case to the US Supreme Court.
