Missourinet

Your source for Missouri News and Sports

You are here: Home / Archives for ACLU

Missouri Supreme Court hears notary requirement arguments; no word on when court will rule

By

The Missouri Supreme Court heard remote oral arguments on Tuesday afternoon in an appeal that aims to remove a notary requirement for mail-in voting for the November general election.

In April, the Missouri NAACP, the League of Women Voters and three registered voters sued the state, Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (R) and others, arguing that the steps to vote by mail during a pandemic are unconstitutional.

The Missouri NAACP and its ACLU attorneys say Cole County Circuit Judge Jon Beetem erroneously upheld the notarization requirement, and they also express concern about a scarcity of notaries.

Missouri Solicitor General D. John Sauer disagrees with that. Counselor Sauer argued on behalf of the state and Secretary Ashcroft.

“The trial court (Cole County circuit court) pointed out that there are, even on plaintiff’s calculation, there are 44,000 notaries in the state of Missouri available to notarize absentee ballots. And there are hundreds of notaries in the secretary of state’s volunteer program,” Sauer tells the court.

He says invalidating the notary requirement is not realistic because voting by mail began on September 22. He says changing the rules midway through the process would subject Missouri voters to different legal requirements during the same election cycle.

Sauer also says invalidating the notary requirement would require reprinting of absentee and mail-in ballot envelopes across Missouri.

The ACLU disagrees with Sauer. They also say that the Cole County circuit court committed multiple errors and erroneously upheld a notarization requirement that imposes burdens on Missourians who are seeking to vote during a global pandemic.

ACLU Foundation attorney Sophia Lin Lakin argued the case on Tuesday.

“No voters will be subjected to different standards here. All voters would exercise their fundamental right under the same standard: having their ballots counted regardless of notarization,” Lin Lakin tells the court.

Some physicians and epidemiologists have filed as friends of the court. They say requiring voters to have absentee ballots notarized present unavoidable increased risks of transmitting the virus that causes COVID.

The ACLU also says Judge Beetem has misapplied a federal case that’s never been applied in Missouri.

There is no word on when the Missouri Supreme Court will rule. One of the questions the Supreme Court is considering is whether the Cole County circuit court failed to consider evidence of burdens associated with requiring ballots to be notarized.

Missouri lawmakers approved the legislation on the final day of session in May. House Democrats were successful in having a photo ID provision removed, in a compromise with Republicans. The legislation from State Rep. Dan Shaul, R-Imperial, has two but separate options.

The first expands absentee voting to those 65 and older, or who are vulnerable to COVID-19, such as elderly residents. Notarization is not required for those 65 and older or who are vulnerable.

The second option expands voting by mail for everyone, but requires notarization.

Click here to read the 128-page brief from the Missouri NAACP, League of Women Voters, ACLU and others.

Click here to read the 121-page brief from Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt’s office, from Solicitor General D. John Sauer.

Copyright © 2020 · Missourinet

Missouri ACLU official on black drivers getting pulled over more frequently: “I live in fear”

By

Annual state data shows African-Americans were pulled over by Missouri law enforcement about 95% more than white drivers last year. The state’s annual vehicle stops report represents a 4% increase from 2018 and the greatest inequality since the report began twenty years ago. It also shows black drivers were 36% more likely than white drivers to get arrested last year.

Missouri ACLU official on black drivers getting pulled over more frequently: “I live in fear”

During a press call with a coalition of social justice and faith leaders, Justice Gatson of the Missouri American Civil Liberties Union says the data is about lives.

“As a black woman in Missouri, a mother, a wife, I live in fear and not just me, countless of my sisters across our state have to hold our breath all the time worrying about our sons, our husbands, the people we love, our sisters too because they’re being brutalized too. And they’re being stopped too,” says Gatson. “My son asked me could he use the car to go to get some ice cream – just like any other teenager wants to do on a late night on a Friday night and I have to say ‘No!’ because I don’t trust our police. I don’t know if my son will come back to me.”

Her husband travels around Missouri operating their small business.

“You all cannot comprehend the fear that I have when he goes out to do some of those jobs,” she says.

Gatson says enough is enough.

“It’s not about numbers for us. We bury people,” she exclaimed.

Sergeant Heather Taylor with the Ethical Society of Police Officers says the numbers are egregious.

“You can explain away some data but some data you can’t,” she says. “You have to look internally within those police departments and most times we are throwing implicit bias at the problems. There’s no data showing implicit bias works. What does work is doing proper investigations before we hire these people that are going out there.”

She says some of the officers are African-Americans who are oppressing their own people.

“We do have that. I’m not going to ever deny that,” says Taylor. “It starts with our hiring and what we’re doing on the front end with that hiring. It’s a problem in St. Louis city, it’s a problem all over the country. I think that we have to focus on police departments and defunding some of the things we are doing in order to get those departments’ attention.”

State statute gives the governor the power to freeze state funding to any law enforcement agency that does not take action to prevent biased policing. During a press conference Monday, Governor Parson, a former Polk County sheriff, was asked about whether he would defund any of the agencies found to have patterns of biased policing.

“What are you talking about? Are you talking about victims’ money that we’re giving for victims to the police departments? Are you talking about the prosecutors’ assistance money that the state’s giving? Are you talking about drug courts,” asks Parson.

To view the report, click here.

Copyright © 2020 · Missourinet

Retired Missouri judge: “Justice cries for Bobby Bostic to be released”

By

A retired St. Louis judge who sentenced a teen to 241 years in prison in 1997 says her sentence should be overturned. Judge Evelyn Baker traveled to the Missouri Capitol in Jefferson City on Tuesday, in support of legislation aimed at providing a parole hearing for Bobby Bostic.

41-year-old Bobby Bostic is incarcerated at the Jefferson City Correctional Center (December 2017 file photo courtesy of Missouri DOC)

Bostic, who’s now 41, is incarcerated at the maximum-security Jefferson City Correctional Center (JCCC). While he was convicted on 16 felony counts, including robbery and armed criminal action, his supporters note his crime did not cause death or serious injuries to victims.

Bostic has been incarcerated since March 1997, for robbing a group of people who were delivering Christmas gifts to needy St. Louisans in 1995.

Judge Evelyn Baker briefed Capitol reporters on Tuesday, and Missourinet asked the retired judge about her 1997 sentence.

“If I knew then what I know now, I would never have sentenced that child (Bostic) to 241 years,” Baker says. “I didn’t know it then, but I do know it now. And it’s my duty to try to rectify a wrong.”

Bostic was 16 at the time of the robbery. Judge Baker says “Bobby was just a kid who was 16 years old. His brain had years to go before he became a full-fledged adult.”

Baker supports bipartisan legislation from State Reps. Nick Schroer (R-O’Fallon) and Barbara Washington (D-Kansas City) that would give Bostic an immediate parole hearing.

Bostic currently has to wait until he’s 112 years old, to get a hearing. Washington says Bostic should have never been certified as an adult, in the case.

Retired St. Louis Circuit Judge Evelyn Baker briefs Capitol reporters on January 21, 2020, as State Reps. Nick Schroer and Barbara Washington look on (photo courtesy of Tim Bommel at House Communications)

As for Schroer, who serves on the Missouri House Judiciary Committee, he tells Capitol reporters that none of Bostic’s victims were killed or seriously injured, adding that Bostic prevented a sexual assault from happening that night.

“It is noteworthy to mention that zero of these victims from that one night have indicated that they are against Mr. Bostic being granted clemency or parole,” says Schroer.

The “St. Louis Post-Dispatch” has reported that Bostic was with an 18-year-old co-defendant during the 1995 incident, and that while two people were shot, no one was seriously injured.

The co-defendant accepted a plea bargain and was sentenced to 30 years, according to the newspaper.

Representative Schroer emphasizes the legislation doesn’t guarantee Bostic parole, but simply a hearing and an opportunity to appear before Missouri’s Probation and Parole Board.

The bill is House Bill 2201.

Schroer also says Bostic has been involved in restorative justice efforts in prison.

“In the months ahead of us you will learn about how Bobby Bostic is a changed man, fully repentant, obtaining many scholastic accolades and degrees,” Schroer says. “He has taken full responsibility for his actions on that one December night in 1995.”

Judge Baker tells the Capitol Press Corps that “justice cries for Bobby Bostic to be released.”

During their press conference, Representatives Schroer and Washington also called on Governor Mike Parson (R) to grant Bostic clemency. Schroer says he spoke to Governor Parson and First Lady Teresa Parson about the case, in 2019.

In addition to Judge Baker, Schroer and Washington were also joined by several lawmakers from both parties. They included State Reps. Tony Lovasco, R-O’Fallon, Dottie Bailey, R-Eureka, Shamed Dogan, R-Ballwin, Rasheen Aldridge Jr., D-St. Louis, LaKeySha Bosley, D-St. Louis, and Tracy McCreery, D-Olivette. The ACLU’s Sara Baker also attended and spoke.

Baker notes Bostic has written poetry and has been teaching other inmates how to read. The Missouri Department of Corrections (DOC) says Bostic has also been involved in the Puppies for Parole program.

Copyright © 2020 · Missourinet

Missouri Legislative Black Caucus Chair praises passage of criminal justice bills (AUDIO)

By

The GOP Missouri House Speaker is praising the Legislature for approving three different major criminal justice reforms. Missouri Legislative Black Caucus Chairman Steven Roberts, D-St. Louis, agrees, noting criminal justice reform has also been a top priority for House Democrats and the Black Caucus.

State Rep. Steven Roberts, D-St. Louis, speaks to the Capitol Press Corps on February 11, 2019 in Jefferson City (file photo courtesy of Ben Peters at House Communications)

“We had legislation expanding diversion courts, legislation that revises our mandatory minimums, especially for non-violent offenses,” Roberts says. “As well as an expansion of our expungements.”

House bill 192 is the legislation revising mandatory minimums. It has support across the political spectrum, from the ACLU to Americans for Prosperity.

It requires Missouri’s Probation and Parole Board to evaluate those serving mandatory minimums and decide if they should be released. Supporters say about 48 percent of Missouri’s prison population is serving time for drug offenses and other nonviolent crime.

Empower Missouri, the ACLU and Americans for Prosperity say that if the bill becomes law, about 200 prisoners will be released in the first ten months.

Chairman Roberts is also pleased with the Missouri General Assembly’s passage of legislation that expands expungements for certain non-violent crimes. He says expungement helps citizens succeed at re-entry, after they complete their sentence.

“And so allowing people who really are trying to get that second chance the opportunity to do so,” says Roberts.

Expungement is a court-ordered process, where the legal record of a criminal conviction is essentially sealed.

State Sen. Kiki Curls, D-Kansas City, sponsors the the expungement bill, which is Senate bill 1. It allows expungement for several non-violent crimes, including stealing, first degree property damage and fraudulent use of a credit device.

The diversion court bill is another bipartisan piece of legislation. House bill 547 from State Rep. Dave Griffith, R-Jefferson City, requires each judicial circuit to establish a veterans’ treatment court.

Griffith’s bill states that it is Missouri’s public policy to encourage and provide an alternate method for the disposal of cases for military veterans and current military members who have substance abuse disorders or mental health disorders.

The bill allows prosecutors to divert criminal cases to a prosecution diversion program.

Roberts emphasizes the importance of bipartisanship on the criminal justice reform issue. He tells Missourinet that House Speaker Elijah Haahr, R-Springfield, met regularly with the Black Caucus in 2019.

“He’s been genuine and I appreciate him stepping up and meeting with us on a monthly basis,” Roberts says.

Speaker Haahr told Capitol reporters on the session’s final day in May that the 2019 session is the most successful policy one he’s seen in his seven years in the Legislature.

Click here to listen to Brian Hauswirth’s full interview with State Rep. Steven Roberts, D-St. Louis, which was recorded on May 17, 2019 at the Statehouse in Jefferson City:

Copyright © 2019 · Missourinet

ACLU head discusses execution protocol lawsuit

By

The American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri has filed a lawsuit challenging the Missouri Department of Corrections’ new execution protocol for its protections for the providers of execution drugs.

When the Department updated its execution protocol this month, it redefined who is considered a member of an execution team to include anyone who prescribes, compounds, prepares or otherwise supplies execution drugs.

Because state law prohibits naming members of an execution team, the ACLU then had to take down documents on its website regarding an earlier protocol because they include the names of suppliers and manufacturers of propofol. A member of an execution team whose identity is revealed could file a lawsuit and recover actual and punitive damages from the entity that revealed that identity.

ACLU Missouri Executive Director Jeffrey Mittman says that definition is too broad.

“This redefinition, to broadly include any member of the execution team including those who provide the drug, is an over broad and unconstitutional, as applied, restriction on free speech.”

When the ACLU publicized public documents about the supply of propofol under the previous protocol, they revealed that the state’s supply had been provided in error by two different suppliers, both of whom had been seeking their return. Missouri shortly thereafter returned its supply of propofol.

Mittman says such revelations are why the publication of such materials should be allowed.

“That’s why the Sunshine Law. That’s why a system of checks and balances. That’s why an organization committed to ensuring that government is doing its job properly is so important.”

The new protocol calls for the Department to carry out executions using the drug pentobarbital, commonly used to euthanize animals. It will be supplied by a “compounding pharmacy,” which typically mixes drugs for individual prescriptions. Mittman says those pharmacies have presented problems in the past.

“A few years back, compounding pharmacies were involved in materials that were not only not beneficial to patients, but actually harmed and in some cases killed patients. There are limited Federal Drug Administration controls over their quality, their expertise, their procedures.”

Mittman says the ACLU wants to be able to put the documents regarding the earlier protocol back up, and to be able to post documents regarding the updated protocol once it has them.

“The ACLU believes that the people of Missouri have a right to know, if the state is executing someone in their name, what procedures are being followed, how it’s being done and what policies and procedures are put into place.”

Some have cited the need for protection under the law of the identity of execution team members in order to prevent retaliation against them. Mittman says the courts have found that there are acceptable protections that are well-defined.

“There are instances where secrecy can be required and is necessary to a proper functioning government. The rule in our country has fortunately always been that if the government is going to withhold information … there needs to be a very specific reason to do that and that secrecy needs to be imposed on narrow grounds that are tailored to fit the government interest.”

Earlier this month Governor Jay Nixon cancelled the execution of convicted murdered Allen Nicklasson, that would have happened Wednesday morning, before ordering the Department to create a new protocol. His was to have been the first execution using propofol. Still scheduled is the November 20 execution of Joseph Franklin, convicted for a 1997 murder.

Mittman says the ACLU of Missouri is not planning action regarding the Franklin execution.

“Because of the importance of the issue right in front of us and right in front of the court, for now we want to focus on ensuring that we are briefing as best as possible and making the most appropriate arguments to the court.”

ACLU, Congressman Clay, PROMO say Supreme Court decision to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act is a historic victory for civil rights (AUDIO)

By

The American Civil Liberties Union says the U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act is a historic move in the advancement of civil rights.

The ACLU of Eastern Missouri in St. Louis says the decision states very clearly that the federal government will no longer discriminate against lesbian and gay couples for unfair treatment under the law. ACLU executive director Jeffrey Mittman says the Supreme Court acknowledges that states that recognize the rights of two people who are in love to make a responsible commitment to one another should be granted those same rights under the federal government.

St. Louis area Congressman Lacy Clay says the decision is a historic turning point that advances full equality for all.

“The high court has affirmed that equal protection under the law applies to every American,” Clay says.

West Central Missouri Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler disagrees. She says marriage should be between a man and a woman, and that children need a mom and a dad.

“Today the Court got it wrong,” she says. “The activist ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act ignored the votes of a bipartisan majority of Congress. This alarming precedent disempowers Congress from making national policy with respect to marriage. We must work to defend the rights of Americans to make marriage policy. We should work to promote the truth of marriage between a man and a woman. It is wise public policy upholding the reality that every child needs a mom and a dad, and society benefits when they do.”

President Obama says he applauds the decision.

“This was discrimination enshrined in law,” Obama says. “It treated loving, committed gay and lesbian couples as a separate and lesser class of people. The Supreme Court has righted that wrong, and our country is better off for it. We are a people who declared that we are all created equal – and the love we commit to one another must be equal as well.”

“This ruling is a victory for couples who have long fought for equal treatment under the law; for children whose parents’ marriages will now be recognized, rightly, as legitimate; for families that, at long last, will get the respect and protection they deserve; and for friends and supporters who have wanted nothing more than to see their loved ones treated fairly and have worked hard to persuade their nation to change for the better,” he says.

He says he’s directed the Attorney General to work with other members of his Cabinet to review all relevant federal statutes to ensure this decision, including its implications for Federal benefits and obligations, is implemented swiftly and smoothly.

 

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel says Defense Department officials will move forward in making benefits available to all military spouses.

“The Department will immediately begin the process of implementing the Supreme Court’s decision in consultation with the Department of Justice and other executive branch agencies,” Hagel says. “The Department of Defense intends to make the same benefits available to all military spouses — regardless of sexual orientation — as soon as possible. That is now the law, and it is the right thing to do. Every person who serves our nation in uniform stepped forward with courage and commitment. All that matters is their patriotism, their willingness to serve their country and their qualifications to do so. Today’s ruling helps ensure that all men and women who serve this country can be treated fairly and equally, with the full dignity and respect they so richly deserve.”

Obama adds that “when all Americans are treated as equal, no matter who they are or whom they love, we are all more free.”

AUDIO: Jessica Machetta reports (1:06)

New effort unveiled to stop financial exploitation of elderly

By Leave a Comment

Peter Kinder State officials have unveiled what they are calling the second phase of a project to stop exploitation of elderly and disabled Missourians. MOSAFE – Missourians Stopping Adult Financial Exploitation – is offering a DVD to help seniors and those who take care of seniors spot the financial rip-off warning signs.

The DVD features "Everybody Loves Raymond" star Doris Roberts. Health officials and Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder – Missouri’s advocate for the elderly – say too many people are being financially exploited. State Health Director Jane Drummond says more often than not the exploiters already have a relationship with the victims – perhaps children or friends – as they are trusted by the victim.

The first video debuted in 2005 and provided training to financial institutions to help them recognize and report suspicious behavior by their customers and help prevent or intervene in cases of financial abuse.

Download/Listen: Steve Walsh report (:60 MP3)

Legislative Committees Consider Abortion Bills

By Leave a Comment

House and Senate committees are considering legislation regarding consent requirements for obtaining abortions. Under both the House and Senate versions of the bill ( HB 1831 & SB 1058 ), abortions could not be performed or induced without the voluntary, informed, and uncoerced consent of the woman at least 24 hours prior to the abortion.

Representative Bob Onder (R-Lake St. Louis), the House sponsor, says the 24 hour requirement is designed to give the woman the opportunity to be fully informed about the procedure and options to that procedure.

The legislation is opposed by Planned Parenthood. Michelle Trupiano, who represents Planned Parenthood affiliates in Missouri, says safeguards are already in place at all abortion clinics in Missouri, so there is no need for this legislation.

In addition to Planned Parenthood and other abortion-rights organizations, the legislation is also opposed by the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU of Eastern Missouri raises free speech concerns because of a component which could make it a crime for a man to engage in certain conversations with a woman involving his desire that she obtain an abortion.

Download/Listen: Steve Walsh reports (:60 MP3)

Sponsor Plans Appeal of Voter Photo ID Ruling

By Leave a Comment

A ruling striking down the Voter Photo ID law will be appealed. Senator Delbert Scott (R-Lowry City), the sponsor of the bill during this year’s legislative session, says the case hasn’t ended with the ruling handed down by Cole County Circuit Judge Richard Callahan. Scott says he’s disappointed with the broad scope of the ruling. Callahan struck down several aspects of the bill, saying they violated the state constitution by infringing on the fundamental right to vote. The only bright spot Scott finds in the ruling is that Callahan dismissed suggestions that legislators pushed the bill, because they wanted to keep certain people from voting. The lawsuit combined two complaints, one of which contained a claim that Republicans pushed the bill through the legislature to suppress Democrat votes, especially ballots cast by black voters. Scott says he has been talking with his attorney. He says no legal strategy has been determined yet. Both sides in the lawsuit predicted the legal challenge will eventually end up before the State Supreme Court.

Federal Lawsuit Filed Against Voter Photo ID Law

By Leave a Comment

A federal lawsuit has been filed against Missouri’s new law that requires voters display photo identification to cast a ballot. The lawsuit, filed in the Western District Court of Missouri, claims the new law violates the US Constitution as well as federal voting laws. A host of groups as well as two individuals filed the lawsuit. Attorney David Becker with People for the American Way says the new law amounts to a poll tax, because it would require people to buy underlying documents to receive a free photo ID from the state. New federal rules require a birth certificate to get a driver’s license and require many married women to produce a marriage certificate to document their change of name. The lawsuit claims that one of the plaintiffs, Maria Frencher of Kansas City, faces insurmountable obstacles in acquiring the needed identification, even though she has been a registered voter for 13 years. The federal lawsuit comes even as a circuit judge is considering the arguments made in a state lawsuit filed against the law.

Related web sites:
SB 1014