Friday, May 04, 2007
Heh
Dear Ms. Upshaw:
DAAP has contacted me regarding the charge that you have filed against DAAP for calling a student on her dorm phone.
As you may know, we had to sue the ASUC three years ago because of similarly frivolous charges. That resulted in an agreement to drop the charges and a payment of $15,000 in attorneys' fees and costs.
As "part of the government of the University of California," the ASUC is subject to the requirements of the First Amendment. Among those requirements is that the ASUC an not prohibit persons from attempting to contact potential voters by telephone. In fact, it wouold be ridiculous if telemarketers and others could call students--but candidates for ASUC office or their supporters could not make such a call.
Similarly, the First Amendment prohibits attempts to limit the right of private organizations to share phone lists and phone numbers with whomever they want to share that information with. In particular, the First Amendment protects the right of student organizations to share publicly circulated petitions (including phone numbers) with whomever that group may wish to share those documents with.
After three years, it seems that the ASUC has still not adopted elementary democratic principles, including those guaranteed by the Bill of Rights in the United States Constitution.
We have contacted Attorney Mark Himmelstein and he advised us to contact you directly.
Both as a matter of democratic principle and as a matter of preserving the indepndence and the funds of the ASUC, we demand that you and the Judicial Council drop these charges against DAAP.
The election is over. The voters have spoken. We accept their judgment. We should all move on to serious business and stop these attempts at petty retribution against persons and parties for their exercise of basic democratic rights.
Sincerely,
SCHEFF & WASHINGTON, P.C.
George B. Washington I wish he had sent some actual precedents for his claims about what the First Amendment does. I'll leave the legal analysis to others.
This is what happens when you show weakness, by the way. The ASUC made a very short-sighted decision in settling last time, and basically invited this kind of thing for all eternity.
Also note that the ASUC's attorney told those folks threatening lawsuits to just contact his client directly. I don't know if he actually showed any inclination to try to defend the ASUC.
What did Dimitri Garcia do to change these evil rules that threaten the First Amendment during his time as senator?
. . .
|
. . .
|
