WheresNWS
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 19 Nov 2002
Posts: 6448
|
 Posted: 06/24/03 - 16:14 Post subject: Since we're on the topic of censorship
|
|
|
A judge ruled that two firefighters who wore blackface during a parade in NYC and were fired because of it, had their 1st amendment rights violated.
Now, I'm not one for censorship, but the first amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Where did Congress make a law prohibiting blackface? I don't believe issues like this to be constitutional in nature. It's simply inappropriate to do something like that and within the rights of an employer to fire employees for such behavior.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030624/ap_on_re_us/racist_float_4
| AP wrote: | By LARRY NEUMEISTER, Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK - The city violated the First Amendment rights of two firefighters and a police officer when it fired them for riding on a parade float in blackface in 1998, a judge ruled Tuesday.
U.S. District Judge John E. Sprizzo said the government "may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because a segment of society finds it offensive."
He rejected statements by former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (news - web sites) that the firings stemmed from concerns over civil unrest, saying he concluded that the "true motivation" was Giuliani's belief that the float was a "disgusting display of racism."
Kate O'Brien Ahlers, a spokeswoman for the city law office, said, "We will definitely be appealing this."
Those on the Labor Day float threw watermelon and fried chicken to paradegoers, the city contended. They also made it appear as if one of the men in blackface was being dragged — not long after the highly publicized case of a black man in Texas who was dragged to his death from a pickup truck, city officials said.
The white employees — firefighters Jonathan Walters and Robert Steiner and police officer Joseph Locurto — sued the city to get their jobs back.
They testified that they had no racist intent and that their actions were protected by the First Amendment because the float, titled "Black to the Future: 2098," was a parody and should be protected by the First Amendment. They also argued they were poking fun at racist views in the predominantly white Queens neighborhood.
Sprizzo ruled after hearing evidence earlier this year, including testimony from Giuliani, who said he urged the firing of the three employees because he feared the controversy might lead to race riots.
At a hearing earlier this year, Sprizzo had cautioned a city lawyer that the mayor needed actual evidence the racism would cause disruption — not just a belief.
"It's so easy to slip into a kind of political correctness that sooner or later will be the end of the First Amendment," the judge said at the time.
Chris Dunn, an attorney with the New York Civil Liberties Union, said the ruling "sends a message that city employees can't be scapegoated to serve a mayor's political agenda and that's exactly what happened here."
Dunn, who represents Locurto, said he had argued from the start that Giuliani ordered the firing of Locurto, "not out of a concern for any disruption but to atone for the mayor's own racial insensitivity."
Giuliani was listed as a defendant in the case. A call requesting comment was not immediately returned by his spokeswoman.
Michael N. Block, a lawyer for Walters, said he and his client were "very pleased." Robert Didio, a lawyer for Steiner, said he was "absolutely thrilled." |
|
|
