PEORIA, IL -- The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois has filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Peoria and its officials including the mayor and police chief, for its recent and infamous Twitter raid of a residence, which resulted in detention of those living in the house and seizure of their electronic property, including cell phones, computers and other goods.
The raid violated the lst and 4th Amendments to the US Constitution, which guarantee free speech and ban unlawful search and seizure of property, the lawsuit says.
Here is a Peoria Journal Star story which includes the federal complaint.
Also check out the Facebook page for links, photos, and other information.
I attended the Peoria news conference on June 12, which featured the top lawyer from the Illinois ACLU, Harvey Grossman, and also the plaintiff, the Twitter creator, Jon Daniel. An audio recording of the event is posted below.
(Full disclosure: I am the newly elected president of the Peoria chapter of the ACLU, and a member for decades.)
Grossman said the main goal of the civil lawsuit is an injunction preventing Peoria from ever conducting such a police raid again.The group is also seeking unspecified damages, which could include their legal expenses.
This is a unique raid, the first of its kind, and should never be repeated, ACLU officials have said.
Grossman, Daniel, and ACLU attorney Roshni Shikari at the news event.
Grossman said the Twitter account was "clearly protected speech," under the US Constitution, and did not even have to be labeled as a parody. That made the search of the residence illegal, as well.
Nothing in the Twitter posts included obscenity or child pornography, and there was no defamation or libel, he said.
The raid "defied common sense," he said."What we expect from our officials is protection of these rights."
The mayor could easily have replied to the posts saying the account was not his. Instead he called the police, Grossman said.
In addition, the Peoria County State's Attorney and the police should have known this was free speech, he said. He didn't mention the three judges who also signed off on the illegal search warrants.
"No one could have looked at this account and not known it was not true," he said. "It was parody and satire."
Defendants in the lawsuit are the mayor and city officials not the State's Attorney or the judges.
But more defendants can be added later, as discovery proceeds, Grossman said.
"For speech we don't like and want to suppress, the answer is more speech," he said.
(Yes, tell that to China, Russia, and the Middle Eastern states including Egypt. Thanks to the Internet, let's hope this is a teachable moment for them, as well as for Peoria and the USA.)
"The warrants were no good, and should have not provided a foundation for the search of the home and seizure" of the items, he said.
The appropriate remedy from the officials is an apology, which has not occurred, Grossman said. They instead have claimed that "nothing was wrong, and that's shocking. We need an apology."
The city fathers need a lesson, and to understand it was wrong. We need an injunction to stop" other such events, he said.
They took a 29-year-old man and treated him as if he had no rights," arrested him as his place of employment, treated him like a felon. "That has consequences," Grossman said, in discussing the monetary damages requested in the lawsuit.
Plaintiff Jon Daniel read from a prepared statement about what happened, and said his goal was only to be funny on the Twitter account. "It would not have been funny if all I did was try to sound like the mayor," he said.
He selected the mayor because no one else had done it, he said.
(Parody accounts are common on Twitter and the Internet, and target public officials, celebrities, sports figures, even the Queen of England.)
When police confiscated his phone, Daniel said, "it was my only means of communication. When I got home I discovered that my room had been searched, drawers were open things out of place and a box of pictures dumped out on the floor," including pictures of his two young children.
His computer and Xbox were seized. "I was very scared and helpless. I could not sleep. I had a sense of impending doom," he said.
"What happened to me was wrong and should never happen to anyone in the future just because they poke fun at the mayor," he said.
The mayor has never contacted him, Daniel said, and neither has the chief of police, who quickly resigned to take a job with Caterpillar, Inc.
The State's Attorney dropped the charges against Daniel, but filed felony marijuana possession charges against Jake Elliott after police found marijuana during their illegal search of the house.
Elliott reportedly told the police it was his, after police threatened to jail everyone in the house. He is free on bail, has a supervisory job, and no police record. His case is proceeding through the courts, but the case against him reportedly could be in trouble because of the illegal search.
He has hired a private attorney, and a fund raiser may be organized for him to help pay legal fees. Could he also have a private lawsuit against the city? Maybe.
Grossman said the Twitter incident has "chilled" the city. "It's important to purge the city of this. If we didn't think the harm was serious, I wouldn't be here."
Asked about precedents, Grossman referred to the infamous seizure of a satiric portrait of the former Chicago mayor Harold Washington by alderman who didn't like it. "We sued the city and got a consent decree which prevents the city from seizing what it doesn't like. We want the city to know what the law is."
Grossman said, "the rules of Twitter are not the rules of the Constitution. You don't have to comply with Twitter's rules of parody to have constitutionally protected speech."
Grossman added, "federal civil rights law holds you to a standard of what a reasonable person should know, which is 'don't be stupid.' The officials violated that maxim."
Could Daniel sue Twitter? "It remains to be seen what Twitter would have done if Daniel had engaged in further conversation with Twitter," Grossman said.
-- Elaine Hopkins
Here's the audio of the event.
ACLU event
Here's the Chicago Tribune's initial story. And an even better follow up.
Here's the PJS's editorial, posted 6/14/14. Calls for City Council to weigh in on the Mayor's threatened lawsuit and legal defense.
Here's the Peoria Journal Star initial story on the event:
Here's the PJS follow up story, which says Mayor Ardis won't apologise and may file a counter lawsuit.
Here's the PJS fact checking story on Ardis news conference where he wouldn't take questions.
Here's a comment via email from Randy Fritz:
Posted by: Randy Fritz 6/13/14
Ardis' tone-deafnesss in his post-ACLU press statement is absolutely astounding. What happened here has nothing to do with his or his family's "hurt feelings" or such. He, like any other citizen, can sign a civil or criminal complaint.
The reality is that he used his position and the incredible power of government to address his personal grievance, something afforded only to those on the "inside," who have easy access to the levers of power.
Yes, it's true that, had he not been mayor, the "attack" would not have occurred. It's also true, though, that nobody held a gun to the man's head and told him to "run for office or else."
Such parodies go with the job. What he has not addressed (and will not, I'm sure) is the use of his government position to misuse law enforcement to assuage his personal/familial "hurt."
To paraphrase Daffy Duck: "that's despicable." But I don't think Ardis gets this, won't in the future, and won't learn from this episode.
Way to go, ACLU. Make public officials see that there is, indeed, a difference between their personal identity and their role as a government servant. And if your skin is THAT thin, Mr. Mayor, better not be an officeholder in the first place.