Justices Reject Local Law on Sex Offenders

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court says a 2007 Allegheny County ordinance that bars sex offenders from living in certain areas is invalid. The ordinance banned registered sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of schools, child-care facilities, community centers and public parks.
Chief Justice Ronald Castille wrote a strongly-worded opinion on behalf of a unanimous high court and said this law would force many to live in isolated areas that in effect become "localized penal colonies."
Witold "Vic" Walczak, legal director for the ACLU of Pennsylvania, says "while places that have passed these ordinances may effectively exclude sexual offenders, the end result is that it's going to funnel these folks into certain other communities and people in those communities aren't going to be too happy."

The high court said the county ordinance is preempted by the state's Megan's Law registration and state policies that promote rehabilitation.

Walczak says he has no doubt that Allegheny County Council members who passed the ordinance were well-intentioned but you have to "look at the big picture" because ultimately these laws are not in the best interest of the community. "In fact they undermine public safety by making it more difficult for sex offenders to re-integrate into the community and be rehabilitated."

The State Supreme Court's opinion stems from a federal lawsuit filed on behalf of several sex offenders. The county appealed federal judge's 2009 ruling striking down the ordinance. The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals then sought the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's input.

Gay Marriage Proponent to Speak at ACLU Event

Pittsburgh native Evan Wolfson will return to the city this Sunday for a discussion on gay marriage legislation. Wolfson earned his JD at Harvard Law School and went on to work for the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund before founding Freedom to Marry. The lecture is sponsored by the American Civil Liberties Union and takes place Sunday evening at the University of Pittsburgh. Wolfson says that being "for" gay marriage is not enough to help people that are gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender. He says it's important that supporters speak out about the issue and not sit quietly on the sidelines. For those opposed to gay marriage, Wolfson says it's still possible to find common ground because everyone understands the desire for love, family and commitment - "people of every party affiliation and every outlook should be able to agree that we don't want the law discriminating in a free country. And we want to do what's right for other people and their families - even if we don't agree with them them. People don't have to dance at my wedding, but they shouldn't be using the government as a weapon to keep me from getting married." He says Pennsylvania excludes gay people from marriage and doesn't provide protection for gay couples or their children. The talk takes place at 7 p.m. at the Teplitz Moot Courtroom at Pitt on March 27.

Speakers Testify on City Police Reform Legislation

Experts from law enforcement, academia and the legal arena spoke out in support of proposed police reform legislation at Pittsburgh Council Thursday. The post-agenda meeting centered on an ordinance drafted by Councilman Ricky Burgess that would require routine data collection by officers and law enforcement administrators. That data would include everything from routine traffic stops to incidents involving the use of force. The information would be published in an annual public report that would specify the make-up of the police force; any legal action against police officers; average response times; arrests by charge, race and gender by zone and specialized units; conviction rates and traffic stops as well as recruitment and retention. Vic Walczak, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania says in the 1990's Pittsburgh police were forced to abide by a consent decree that help bring the department in line. But he says he's sure the police union will come out against the legislation as hamstringing their operations, "that is demonstrably false because other police departments around the country do it, and the city of Pittsburgh police department has done it--they were forced to do it under the consent decree--and crime went down." Walczak says there's a perception in the black community that it is under siege, "and until and unless the city measures what their officers are doing and publicizes it, they can't credibly come out and say there's no problem." Wayne Babish, a former police officer and adjunct professor at the University of Pittsburgh supports the legislation and says over time, police officers will recognize its benefits, "a police chief would welcome and view this proposed legislation as an opportunity to communicate and collaborate with elected officials." Burgess' legislation was sparked by the alleged beating of Jordan Miles, a black high-school student, by white, plain-clothed police officers in Homewood in January 2010. An investigation into that incident is still pending.

Mediation Tried in G20 Lawsuits

Lawyers have agreed to try mediating a lawsuit in which 25 plaintiffs are seeking damages from the City of Pittsburgh for alleged rights violations during the G20 economic summit of September 2009.

Attorney Sara Rose of the American Civil Liberties Union says both her clients and the city want a settlement to resolve the case. She says a jury could only award monetary settlements, rather than change the City Code, because many law enforcement regulations during the summit were temporary.

Rose says state law requires both sides to choose between arbitration, mediation, or early neutral evaluation before the court case can begin. The ACLU lawyer says the mediation is tentatively scheduled for May.

Teacher and ACLU reach Agreement

The American Civil Liberties Union has reached an agreement with the Brownsville Area school district who suspended a teacher because photographs of her with a stripper appeared online.

Ginger D’Amico, a high school Spanish teacher in Fayette County was penalized after images of her with a stripper at a bachelorette party she hosted for a fellow teacher were posted on Facebook. The photos were posted by another school district employee and were online for less than a day. She was suspended for 30 school days without pay because hers was the only identifiable face in the photos.
"That’s the first time I’ve ever been in any kind of trouble in 14 years of teaching. I really was devastated because I really take pride in being a good teacher and a mentor and it kind of ripped my heart out," she said.

D’Amico’s record was cleared and she will be paid back wages for the time she was suspended. She will also get a $10,000 dollar settlement that will be split with the ACLU, who provided her legal representation.

Vic Walczak, legal director for Pennsylvania’s ACLU says the question raised is to what extent public employers discipline employees for off-duty conduct. Legally, he says this is a gray area.

"There needs to be a line that restricts public employers from being allowed to punish employees only if they do something that substantially harms the employer and emloyee’s ability to do their job," he said.

Butch Santicola, spokesman for the Pennsylvania State Education Association says this is a recurring problem with teachers.

"The technology that’s out there with the cell phones and cameras and pictures are being taken, facebook, twitter all of them, we’re very cautious of that and we need to be very very cautious of that," he said.
Other school district employees received disciplinary letters. Their arbitration is scheduled for September.

Groups Don't Want Arizona Immigration Law in Pennsylvania

Arizona's new immigration law and the introduction of a similar measure in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives is spurring action in Pittsburgh's legal and immigration community. David Harris, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh says the glaring problem with the legislation is that it is counter productive to fighting crime. Harris says not only are illegal immigrants five times less likely to commit crimes than native-born Americans, but the law drives a wedge between law enforcement and the immigrant community. That divide will keep victims and witnesses from coming forward to report criminal activity.

Arizona Senate bill 1070 requires law enforcement to question individuals they deem reasonably suspicious about their immigration status during police encounters. Harris says a number of law enforcement organizations are coming out against Arizona's law--including the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Major City Chiefs Association--because it stymies their mission of fighting crime. Harris says the law is also on shaky legal ground because immigration enforcement is usually the realm of the federal government, not the state. He doesn't dispute citizen's desire to have stronger border enforcement, but says this type of legislation does more harm that good.

A forum taking place Monday evening will feature a panel of speakers--including Harris, Vic Walczak, legal director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania and Christina Powers of the Pennsylvania Immigration Resource Center, among others. They will discuss what the actual Arizona law says and why they think it doesn't make sense for public policy or public safety. The meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. at the Friends Meeting House, 4836 Ellsworth Avenue in Pittsburgh.