Dear friends, colleagues, allies, and community members,
 
I saw some of you at the vigil Saturday night in response to horrific violence committed on the MAX. All of you are in my thoughts. These are incredibly difficult times when confronted with utterly senseless and tragic violence. These are the moments that test us as individuals, organizations, and as a society.
 
We are sickened by President Trump who has embraced and promoted a racist and xenophobic platform. And it is clear that the elevation of these ideas to the highest office has emboldened people to act on the politics of hate. As a result, many of us live in fear while ignorant acts of prejudice, intimidation, and violence skyrocket. We have and will continue to be in the trenches with you fighting against this agenda.
 
I am writing this letter because the ACLU of Oregon wants to be in connection, dialogue, and solidarity with you as we struggle to move forward. In a world of sound bites, we have not conveyed the depth of our thoughts and feelings. I want to explain more about where we are coming from. 
 
As you may know, we have recently taken what is considered by some to be an unpopular position by calling out Mayor Wheeler for viewpoint discrimination. Thank you for your patience in giving me space to further explain our position with more context. 
 
Mayor Wheeler recently called on the federal government to revoke the permit for the “Trump Free Speech Rally” at a federal plaza downtown on June 4 and has called for a stop to the proposed anti-Muslim event by the same organizers that was scheduled for June 10.  We have critiqued this position and believe it is the wrong choice.
 
Revoking or denying the permit without concrete evidence of an imminent threat of violence amounts to government censorship and is unconstitutional. The Constitution doesn’t allow the government to censor speech or expression based on viewpoint. Yes, even hate speech is protected by the First Amendment. 
 
Standing up for the rights of hateful people is very difficult, especially in a climate where so many of us feel under attack. But there are very important reasons to do so. The Constitution doesn’t work unless it works for everyone, and it’s the Constitution that provides the best protections for oppressed communities.
 
This is personal for me. My family knows what it is like to be targeted by racism, intimidation, and violence. To be honest, defending the constitutional rights of people who espouse hate and whose values I despise is something I am always reluctant to do. There is no other way to say it; it pains me. And I recognize why this position may be unpopular.
 
A colleague told me that people in his organization interpreted ACLU’s message as “we need to follow the law” and how disappointing that message was when the law hasn’t been working for our communities. Although I was dismayed by the interpretation of our message, I understand the sentiment.
 
Communities of color experience many damaging double burdens in the U.S. We are not only disproportionately hurt by crime, we are also ravaged by mass incarceration and the justice system that’s supposedly meant to keep us safe. This year was the 75th anniversary of the executive order that paved the way for the incarceration of over 120,000 Americans of Japanese ancestry. This country’s history is riddled with examples of how the government has used laws to marginalize and oppress communities.
 
The ACLU’s mission and history is to protect and advance the civil rights and civil liberties of all people in the United States, and so we are well aware of the history of abuses against communities of color, immigrants, religious minorities, and others. This history is exactly why we do not believe the government should censor anyone – even those people whose messages disgust us. It is a very dangerous and slippery slope. Do we really want government to determine what is legitimate, appropriate, and safe speech? The same government currently led by a president and attorney general who called Black Lives Matter terrorists last year? It is fairly easy to imagine what happens next. It is actually the First Amendment rights of oppressed communities and our activists that get silenced. 
 
When we allow the government to pick and choose how to apply constitutional rights, it is marginalized communities that have the most to lose. Again, the Constitution doesn’t work unless it works for everyone.
 
There is a tremendous amount of pain, fear, and anger right now. Moments like these can get the best of us. Most of us are struggling for answers and to identify the right strategies for healing, safety, and community empowerment. There is plenty to consider and grapple with in times like these when responding to tragic, hate-driven violence.
 
Although we don’t purport to have the answers, the ACLU of Oregon will stay resolute in defending the rights of everyone. This work not only includes defending our rights to free speech and assembly, but also ending law enforcement profiling, stopping anti-immigrant ballot measures, fighting to protect LGBT communities, defending voting rights, and working against discrimination in all its forms. 
 
On an optimistic note, I am inspired by the incredible acts of resistance and community building happening around the country and the world right now. All of our collective organizing and belief in the Constitution have led to some incredible victories in the past five months. The courts, backed by the hundreds of thousands of people who have been mobilizing, have stopped Trump’s Muslim Ban 1.0 and 2.0, Trump’s attack on sanctuary cities and states, and the racist voting laws in North Carolina, just to name a few amazing victories.
 
We will stand with people who are loudly saying the ideologies and actions of hate don’t reflect our community. We will amplify those messages. We will support counter-protests, as well as attempts to heal and address the trauma in our communities. And we will also push back on attempts to increase government surveillance, to further militarize the police, and to maintain the over-reliance on incarceration in the name of “safety.” It will not make us safer.
 
We hope to create intentional spaces to further discuss and explore these issues. We look forward to working with you, learning from you, and making the road as we walk it together in our collective struggle for justice. 
 
Peace,
 
david rogers
Executive Director
ACLU of Oregon
 

 

Date

Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - 2:30pm

Featured image

David Rogers

Show featured video/image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

26

Style

Standard with sidebar

Update: A grand jury recording bill was passed by the Oregon legislature and is headed to the governor's desk to be signed into law!

This was originally published as a guest column by The Oregonian/OregonLive.

By Irene Kalonji

Like any mother, I had worries and dreams for my children. Will they get a good job? Will they find love? Will I become a grandmother?

Like any mother of black sons, I also worried about their safety with police. How could I not when day after day there are stories of profiling and police violence against young black men?

My worst nightmares came true when my 19-year-old son Christopher was killed by police in our home after we called them for help. Making the nightmare worse, my husband and I have serious doubts about whether the district attorney truly advocated for our son in the investigation into his death.

Christopher struggled with mental health issues. After a rough encounter with police, his mental health suffered and he became convinced he would be killed by law enforcement. On the day he was supposed to appear in court as a result of his police encounter, Christopher had a mental breakdown and locked himself in his room with his gun. We called 911 for help, and so did Christopher from his room.

When the police showed up, Christopher stripped down to his boxer shorts to show that he was unarmed and sat in his window to talk to them. What happened next is unclear. My son was shot and tear gas canisters were thrown into his room. No one checked on him for four hours, while he lay there bleeding on his bedroom floor. Finally, my son was taken to OHSU, but it was too late. It breaks my heart that he died without any of his family by his side.

We weren’t with him when he died because during the standoff, my husband and I were taken to the police station to answer questions about our son’s mental health. We later realized that these interrogations were not to help Christopher, but rather to build justifications for shooting our son. When police finally told us Christopher had been killed, we were overcome with grief. We also felt deeply betrayed.

Did you know that the police investigate themselves when they shoot someone? Then the same district attorney who works side-by-side with police on criminal cases takes the police findings to a grand jury to decide whether or not to bring charges against the officers involved. You won’t be surprised to hear that officers are rarely charged with misconduct under this scheme, but you probably don’t know that here in Oregon, there is hardly any record kept of this process.

My husband and I wanted to know the truth about our son’s death, so we asked for the grand jury proceedings to be recorded. For reasons that still confuse us, the Clackamas County District Attorney’s office refused. We have been told that the only records that exist of the grand jury are one page of handwritten notes and a jury form. And we will need a court order to see even that.

What evidence was the jury shown? What testimony did they hear? Was it a foregone conclusion that the officers who killed my son would not be indicted? I have my suspicions, but the hard truth is that we will probably never know. 

There is an easy solution to this problem: Record all grand jury proceedings. The Oregon Legislature is currently considering a bill to do just that, Senate Bill 496. But district attorneys are opposing it. What are they afraid of?

The grief and pain of losing our teenage son has taken its toll on us. We will never be the same. The feeling that justice was not served for Christopher adds to our pain. As a mother, how will I ever find peace? Oregon legislators should support SB 496 to bring transparency to the grand jury process, so that no other family will have to go through what we have.

 

 

Date

Saturday, June 10, 2017 - 7:15pm

Featured image

Irene Kalonji holds a sign with her son's face on it at a memorial event

Show featured video/image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

26

Style

Standard with sidebar
by Mat dos Santos, Legal Director

On Sunday, thousands of people peacefully assembled in downtown Portland to express themselves, just as the First Amendment envisions. A planned alt-right rally, the timing of which was awful and lacked respect for the city’s grief over the murders on the MAX the previous week, drew many more counter-protesters than attendees. The tremendous outpouring of support from numerous immigrant rights groups, organized labor, faith based movements, and other antiracists showed the alt-right demonstrators that, while they have a constitutional right to speak, their message of white supremacy is unwelcome by the people of Portland.  
 
This is the power of the First Amendment. When we organize and collectively raise our voices, we can reject the messages of hate and intolerance that permeate our communities. 
 
For the first four hours of the demonstrations, law enforcement successfully kept groups separated in an effort to avoid conflict. Overall, the strategy of keeping people separated, while allowing each group to be heard, kept the peace for hours. Things took a dangerous turn as police deployed flashbang grenades, chemical irritants, and less-lethal bullets at the antifascist gathering—to the cheers of the alt-right group—after the police announced that projectiles and a foul-smelling liquid were thrown from the roof of the public bathroom in Chapman Park.
 
While we understand that policing is no easy task, the pattern in Portland is clear. After a rock, stick, or liquid is thrown, Portland protests regularly devolve into the indiscriminate use of force and crowd control weapons. Our democracy is not so fragile that a rock thrown turns off the First Amendment for everyone in our city. This kind of disproportionate response is dangerous to our democracy and our lives.
 
To our knowledge, no other police force in America uses crowd control weapons with the regularity of the Portland Police Bureau. It bears repeating that these “less lethal” weapons are dangerous and indiscriminate. In fact, our staff attorney, who was serving as legal observer in Chapman Square, was accosted with chemical irritants and then shot in the back of her leg as she was trying to comply with police orders. A street medic was shot while treating someone for injuries sustained during the police action. Flashbangs went off immediately behind an elderly person using a cane as they desperately tried to exit the park, causing her to stumble. These are just a few of many examples of innocent people being caught up in Sunday’s police violence. It may be tempting to find comfort in the fact that in a very tense scenario things did not get far worse, but we cannot accept this as normal law enforcement behavior.
 
Unnecessary and excessive use of force isn’t just bad for those caught up in the action, but it also stops members of the public from coming out and participating in our democracy. After police used crowd-control weapons on Sunday, many of the peaceful protesters gathered for a permitted counter-protest in front of City Hall left, fearful of being swept up in the police action. In other words, the actions of Portland law enforcement chilled the constitutionally-protected speech of peaceful protesters. 
 
Unfortunately, the excessive response from law enforcement didn’t stop at firing projectiles at Chapman Square. Police orders rapidly changed at this point and officers backed Chapman Square protesters all the way into Lownsdale Park, and then told them that it too was closed. Having been forced out of two public parks, protesters then began a spontaneous march through the streets. Police then blocked in or “kettled” everyone present on an entire city block where the spontaneous march was moving, nearly 200 people, and announced that they were detaining them to investigate disorderly conduct. Disorderly conduct is a minor offense and hardly something the police should prioritize at the expense of the constitutional rights of those who were detained.  
 
Numerous members of the media and two ACLU legal observers were detained in that kettle. When they asked to be released, they were denied. It is unfathomable that the police had any basis for holding the media and ACLU legal observers for the purported investigation of particular subjects—the legal requirement for temporary detainment—of such a minor offense. Before allowing the protesters, bystanders, media, and legal observers to leave the kettle, law enforcement required each of them to show their ID, be photographed, and have their ID photographed. Some were told they could be arrested at a later day. The whole process took over an hour.
 
We have received many questions about the kettle, so let me take a minute to answer them:
  1. Oregon law does not require people to show identification to the police, unless they are driving.
  2. While police may detain someone suspected of committing a crime, they must actually be suspected of committing a crime. It is virtually impossible that Portland Police had reasonable suspicion to stop nearly 200 people including media and legal observers.
  3. Photographing the face and ID of every person detained is a likely violation of the Oregon state law prohibiting the collection and retention of personal information based on political beliefs. 
  4. If the information was subsequently entered into a federal database, Portland Police also likely violated federal privacy rules.
We are troubled by the continued crackdown on protest by Portland Police and cooperating agencies, but the kettling of individuals and refusal to let clearly innocent people free until they had been documented was another low for our city. 
 
This weekend, Portland was a microcosm of all that is fundamental and also frightening about the First Amendment. It is sobering to hear the deeply traumatic and hurtful words of bigots. But on Sunday, we saw the resolute power of our fundamental freedoms of speech and assembly when we collectively came together to drown out bigotry.

Date

Tuesday, June 6, 2017 - 7:00pm

Featured image

police kettle protesters on block in downtown Portland

Show featured video/image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

26

Style

Standard with sidebar

Pages

Subscribe to ACLU of Oregon RSS