Missourinet

Your source for Missouri News and Sports

You are here: Home / Archives for ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

Effort to Raise Awareness of New Voting Requirement Underway

By

An attempt to raise awareness about Missouri’s new requirement that voters present photo identification before casting a ballot in November is underway by the state officeholder who opposed the idea. And even as Secretary of State Robin Carnahan travels the state, the Department of Revenue continues to assure Missourians it has enough time to get proper identification in the hands of everyone who wants to vote in November. The Department of Revenue is within the Blunt Administration. Governor Blunt and Secretary of State Carnahan have been at odds over the requirement, an issue that divided state government along party lines. Blunt, and fellow Republicans, say the requirement will reduce the chances for voter fraud. Carnahan, and fellow Democrats, insist it’s a solution seeking a problem; that Republicans have yet to prove voter fraud is a real problem in the state. Republicans used their majority status in the House and Senate to approve the measure this session and send it to Blunt for his signature. The photo ID requirement begins with the November elections. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed suit against the new law, claiming the legislature violated the constitution by not appropriating money for local governments to carry out its provisions. The new law calls on the Secretary of State’s office to notify voters about the new requirement. The Department of Revenue is required to issue photo identification without charge to those who lack a driver’s license or passport, both of which can be used to fulfill the new requirement. Carnahan is traveling to Maplewood, Kansas City, Springfield and Jefferson City to raise awareness about the new requirement. Carnahan is calling her office’s initiative “Show Your Face at the Polls”. It will include public service announcements in the media to make Missourians aware of the change. The Department of Revenue will dispatch 25 mobile units to issue photo identification to those who don’t have it, especially senior citizens living in nursing homes. The Revenue Department estimates there are 170,000 voting-age Missourians who don’t have a driver’s license or other photo identification. A spokesman for the Revenue Department says he doesn’t expect all 170,000 to either want photo identification or to be eligible to vote for various reasons.

Prison Abortion Rights Upheld

By

A court ruling that forced the state to transport a pregnant female prisoner to an abortion clnic last year has been made to apply to all women in Missouri prisons. Federal Judge Dean Whipple has ruled that the US Supreme Court order that Missouri provide the transportation and guards to the inmate, known only as Jane Roe, applies to any pregnant inmate who wants an abortion. Whipple made the original ruling that the state must provide transportation and guards so that Roe could be taken from the Vandalia prison to a St. Louis abortion clinic. The state estimated the cost for transportation and guard salaries at $350. Roe had been sentenced to four years in prison after being arrested for probation violation in California. She had an abortion October 20th, three days after the US Supreme Court upheld Whipple’s ruling. The American Civil Liberties Union asked the court to make the ruling a class action on behalf of all pregnant women imprisoned in Missouri. The ACLU states that at least one female inmate was denied transportation to an abortion clinic since the Roe case. Governor Blunt has urged the Attorney General to appeal the decision, stating, “This ruling violates our traditional Missouri values and is an affront to everyone that values the sanctity of human life.”

Voter Photo ID Law challenged

By

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit saying the new Voter Photo-ID law is unconstitutional. The lawsuit says the law will disenfranchise thousands of Missourians who cannot afford to obey its requirements to provide proper documents to get their I-D cards. It also says the legislature has violated the Hancock amendment, which prohibits the legislature requiring local governments to spend money without providing state funds to pay those costs. The lawsuit filed in Jefferson City asks a judge to block implementation of the law, which will apply for the first time to the November election. The legislature passed the bill during the regular session that ended in May. However, it did not approve any state appropriations to pay various costs of the program.