Judge bans Black Lives Matter clothing from courtroom

[applegrove]

Judge bans Black Lives Matter clothing from courtroom

by Thandisizwe Chimurenga at Daily Kos

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2015/11/10/1448124/-Judge-bans-Black-Lives-Matter-clothing-from-courtroom

"SNIP................


Yesterday, four Black Lives Matter (BLM) protestors in Worcester, Massachusetts, had their trial date rescheduled to January of 2016. Now, we’re hearing that the judge in the case, Central District Court Judge Robert Pellegrini, has ruled that none of the protestors will be allowed to wear clothing with the words “Black Lives Matter” on them.

Sonya Conner, Kevin Ksen, Robert Blackwell Gibbs and Julius Jones were appearing before the judge when he noticed Jones was wearing a white sweatshirt with the words "Bulletproof. Black Lives Matter" in gold lettering.

A supporter of the protestors was allegedly told that she had to turn her “Black Lives Matter” shirt inside out before she could enter the courthouse to observe the proceedings, according to Jones.

The protestors, who are charged with disturbing the peace, have pleaded not guilty and say that their actions were a protected form of free speech. They are also arguing that their rights to freedom of speech are being trampled on by the judge’s new ruling on what they can wear.




..................SNIP"

[randys1]

1. NO racism in America, remember?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

14. I don't agree with the judge in this case

however, crying "racism" with no evidence of such isn't valid either.

If the judge disallows BLM clothing but allows Confederate flag clothing, then I'll agree, there's a racial motive. But until then, I'm not going to assume racism.

[applegrove]

2. Since when do police have to not wear uniforms? One should never change the rules of the justice

system on a whim. Sounds like the judge dislikes BLM and will do whatever it takes to put it down. Including telling everyone how to dress.

[VanillaRhapsody]

3. Just wear them inside out!

The shirts will all be the same and everyone with a reversed screen print showing...is silently in support of BLM! All it needs is pictures in social media...no words...

[brush]

4. No, they need to sue that judge, or whatever to protect their 1st Amendment rights

A judge should not be able to get away with that.

[VanillaRhapsody]

7. I am sure the ACLU will get involved...but in the short term...

[GGJohn]

11. The ACLU can get involved all they want,

but judges have always had wide latitude on what they allow in their courtrooms, and I doubt the ACLU would win this.

[Volaris]

20. Agreed.

Besides, civil disobedience (if done correcrly) almost REQUIRES an appearance in a courtroom.

If you're not getting a ticket for it, you're not doing it right.
Proper courtroom decorum, at the Judges discretion, is part of the process.

It's can still be a dick move on the judges part, however.

[GGJohn]

21. Agreed. eom.

[msongs]

5. court rooms should be a neutral space IMO. or would you all like cheerleaders and marching

bands advocating for litigants too?

[chillfactor]

6. I agree...

a courtroom is not the place for theatrics....it is a solemn atmosphere were participants dress appropriately....I completely understand why the judge ruled as he did.

[brush]

10. I agree to disagree. IMO a judge should not be able to trump First Admendment rights.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

12. Judges have to be able to trump First Amendment rights

to some degree. I don't however agree that it's valid in this case.

[Volaris]

22. Without an efficient and functional Justice System, tho..

The first amendment isn't worth the paper it's written on.

Agree with you that disagreement, however is allowed AND appropriate.

[backscatter712]

28. He should require cops to wear civilian clothes.

Having cops testify while wearing their dress blues would taint the jury.

[MADem]

34. The cops are going to wear civilian clothes. It's in the article.

As I said elsewhere here, I recently attended a trial where family of the victim were warned ahead of time, by the prosecution, to not wear any visual references to the victim--e.g. t-shirts with photos or names, etc. We were told we wouldn't be admitted if we did (and we were the aggrieved party).

The first responders at that trial (and there were three police that testified, as well as a fireman-EMT and the Fire Chief-also an EMT) ALL wore civilian clothes. Every last one of them. I don't remember a ruling about that, I did attend most of the preliminary hearings, but that may have been worked out in chambers.

In any event there were NO uniforms in the courtroom, save those of the baliffs and the guys who came to cuff/drag the guilty bastard off to jail after sentencing.

[hifiguy]

16. This. I clerked for two trial court judges

who would have found this absolutely inappropriate and unacceptable in a courtroom. NO judge would find this appropriate.

Courtrooms are not proper fora for making political statements of any kind.

[chillfactor]

29. AMEN! N/T

[SickOfTheOnePct]

8. It's a given that free speech rights don't apply in a courtroom

However, I think the judge is out of bounds in this case.

[GGJohn]

9. Most courtrooms ban shorts, halter tops, sandels,

and clothing that can be disruptive, judges have wide latitude on what is allowed in their courtroom and I happen to agree with him on this.
Would you approve of white supremacists wearing white power shirts in a courtroom?

[applegrove]

13. White Power shirts are not the same as Black Lives Matter shirts. One is talking about exclusive

power for themselves, one is talking about the right to exist.

[GGJohn]

15. I'm not saying they're the same,

I'm saying that one can be just as disruptive in a courtroom as another and judges have the discretion to ban what they perceive as inappropriate attire, which is what this judge is doing.

If he allows these shirts in his courtroom, then he has to allow all shirts.

[hifiguy]

17. And both are equally unacceptable in a courtroom.

Period.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

18. It doesn't matter

If a judge decides he doesn't want anything in the courtroom that carries a "message", he has the right to ban it.

I don't agree with him banning the BLM clothing, but I do believe he has every right to do so.

[applegrove]

19. I agree the judge has every right to do it, but it is wrong. If you have to change what police wear

in court, you are changing your basic own dam rules for some reason. BLM being controvertial is a GOP meme meant to gaslight and agitate the people to whom it means a lot. If I wore a shirt into court that says, "I don't know what a feminist is, I just know I get called one whenever my actions separate myself from a doormat" and a judge said that was not allowed then I would feel that was wrong too.

[linuxman]

23. No kidding?

It's almost as if judges have incredible powers of discretion in their courtrooms and don't want a political circus.

Weird, right?

[applegrove]

24. I don't think a shirt saying who you are, means a circus.

[GGJohn]

25. The judge disagrees,

and he's the one that has the discretion of what attire he allows in his courtroom.

[linuxman]

26. It's a political statement, and politicizes a court environment.

Most people understand that's not acceptable.

[hifiguy]

27. Yup. nt

[chillfactor]

30. THANK YOU!

I do not get why some people on this thread do not understand that.

[840high]

31. Yes.

[Throd]

35. Yes it does.

[MADem]

32. This is apparently standard guidance in commonwealth courtrooms.

I recently attended the trial of an individual whose negligence resulted in the death of a loved one close to me. Those of us who were identified as victim-family-friends were advised ahead of the trial that we weren't to wear any clothing with visual representations or comments about the deceased. For sentencing, though, all bets were off. That kind of thing isn't our style, anyway.

[applegrove]

33. So sorry for your loss. I have not spent more than 10 minutes in a courtroom. I stand corrected.

[MADem]

36. We got justice. That's all we could hope for. Can't bring back the dead, sadly.

I mentioned upthread that the police/fire-emts who responded and testified (both at preliminary hearings and during the trial) did not come in uniform. They wore nice suits or sports coats, and to a man (they were all men) they chose to stand during their testimony (the judge let people sit/stand as they liked). The only uniforms in the court were the judge in a robe and the baliffs in their police-like suits. The guys who came to transport the guilty party to jail after sentencing also wore some tough looking black uniforms, but by then, the deal was done.

I've spent what seems like an eternity in courtrooms over the last couple of years. I have never seen more delay-delay-obstruct-delay-change dates-change venues-object-blah/blah in my life. The cheesy tactics of the defendant's lawyers (he had a couple of them) cost his family a fortune and probably got him a worse result. The jury spent very little time coming back with a guilty verdict. We probably would have been more forgiving had it not been for the hardball attitude of the defense attorney.

[Lil Missy]

37. a courtroom is not an appropriate place for demonstrations

Or political protests. Judge was right to ban the clothes