20 ms·
ACLU sues Minnesota for police violence against the press
- DoofusOfDeath 6y agoOne thing I've never understood is how ACLU has legal standing to file many of its suits. I'm assuming that ACLU isn't claiming to be the injured party in suits like this current one. Are they acting as attorneys for one of the alleged victims?
- c0nsumer 6y agoYes. Read the filing here: https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/goyette-v-city-minneapolis https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/goyette-v-city-minneapol...
- csnover 6y agoFor anyone who doesn’t want to read the legal complaint, the named class action plaintiff (Jared Goyette) was shot in the face by the police with a “less lethal” round[0] and nearly permanently lost his eyesight[1] after he had just finished reporting on a man who had been shot in the head by the police with a “less lethal” round.[2] [0] https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1265786797650558976 https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1265786797650558976 [1] https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1266115234420400129 https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1266115234420400129 [2] https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1265779746153078793 https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1265779746153078793
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- oftenwrong 6y agoIn this case it is a class-action lawsuit filed by the ACLU on behalf of the journalists. The lead plaintiff is a journalist who was shot by the police while covering a protest.
- inetknght 6y agoClass-action lawsuits in the USA often end up being settled with little or no real action. I hope for better here but I'm not going to hold my breath on it.
- kyboren 6y agoThis is because class actions are often little more than schemes to enrich attorneys. This is not such a case and ACLU are not such attorneys.
- sukilot 6y agoThe suit is only asking for some money and for the Court to order the state to stop breaking the law even though the state presumably believes it is not breaking the law It's almost entirely symbolic.
- JackC 6y agoWhen ACLU brings a lawsuit on behalf of an individual, it’s common for the government to moot the lawsuit by changing the treatment of that one person, or offering a settlement to that one person, or even deporting that person, without changing its behavior in general. A class action means the government can’t avoid the lawsuit that way. What you’re saying is a real issue in general, but not relevant to class actions as used as a civil rights tactic by ACLU.
- jedberg 6y agoIn case you agree and want to help with money: https://action.aclu.org/give/now https://action.aclu.org/give/now
- davidw 6y agoDone, thanks! I hadn't given to them in a while.
- epmatsw 6y agoFor those of us here who receive stock compensation, you can donate that directly too! If the stock has long term capital gains, the tax savings can let you donate even more. https://www.aclu.org/gifts-stock https://www.aclu.org/gifts-stock
- myself248 6y agoIs there a way to give anonymously, such that I won't get spam from other charities who found out I gave to this one? I don't know if the ACLU does that, but literally every other charity I've ever given to has, and I value my data more than that.
- rtkwe 6y agoI do wish there was an I'm not interested in donating option for mailers or a list I could get on to say I'm not interested. One good thing about calls is at least you can get off the list, no option for that I've seen with mailer spam.
- jedberg 6y agoI'm not sure. But you can try to find a friend who is already donating and give them the money to donate for you. Or if you trust random internet stranger, you can Venmo/Zelle/PayPal me the money and I'll donate for you. I'm already on their list.
- CGamesPlay 6y agoI don't know if there's a way for you to give anonymously or not. Knowing how charities work in general, I doubt it (though there are ideas in sibling comments for workarounds). If there is not, please consider the sacrifice of your data as part of your donation. I hope you fairly weigh the cost of unwanted solicitations for donations showing up at your home versus the cost of unwanted police violence against citizens in their homes in Minnesota.
- zucker42 6y agoI read through the whole complaint and it's a pretty shocking catalog of abuse of power, discretion, and force. And it only covers actions against journalists, and only in the city of Minneapolis.
- colllectorof 6y agoIt shouldn't be shocking for anyone who was paying attention. There is a good book about related issues by Radley Balco called Rise of the Warrior Cop. Published in 2013. Unlike many comments here and on other websites it's not hysterical, or hyperbolic or contaminated with self-referential post-modernist bullshit. It is a sober and factual analysis of how American police became what it is right now. It's not an easy read, but it's a must-read for anyone who wants to have a reasonable picture of the problem. The public notion of good policing and the actual practices police departments follow have been diverging for several decades (if they ever converged). What we're seeing right now is not some inexplicable increase in bad behavior or cops deliberately targeting journalists. For modern American police this is just business as usual, except the volume of deployment is significantly higher than in the past few decades and the visibility is much higher as well. Edit: There is a flip side to this coin. When you have a systemic problem of this scale, you should be cautious about making simplistic (especially moral) judgements about individuals in the system. When someone's training, incentives, position in the community and even equipment nudge them towards bad actions, even decent people will routinely do bad things.
- zucker42 6y agoDon't get me wrong, I understand police violence is a continuing problem, but that doesn't make this instance of it less shocking. As a meta note, I've noticed that people often respond to comments saying "I'm shocked with a recent occurrence of X" with "X has always been bad and been happening for a long time" and in my opinion that response only serves to desensitize people to the bad thing.
- jfengel 6y agoThe problem is that people are already desensitized. They've watched X come and go and they act shocked every time. Then they continue to push it down their list of priorities when they vote. By next week this will be pushed out of the news. By November it will be completely forgotten, except among the minority who it directly affects and were already aware. All of the outrage you hear now will not translate into change. So when people say "X has been bad for a long time", people need to hear that as "and this time you should remember it and do something".
- megous 6y agoIt's like Lysander Spooner was onto something with his pamphlet "No Treason". State representatives mentioned in the brief are barely distinguishable from highway robbers. The swearing language, the lack of care for any legal basis for their actions, baseless physical attacks, like shooting harmless people with rubber bullets, the attitude, etc.
- MBCook 6y agoAs so many of these incidents have happened over the last few days it seems like there should be a law that heightens the penalties when cops attack the press compared to the current penalties.
- leetcrew 6y agoI don't think the press should have special protections over ordinary citizens. the penalty for any unwarranted use of force should be increased to whatever you would want for journalists.
- dpeck 6y agoYes! Press is a thing people do, not a credential people have. All people should have freedom to observe and report on (to the extent they wish or do not wish to) actions of the state. Restricting that should have severe punishment.
- ghouse 6y agoAgreed, though be careful what you ask for. If you're not a publisher (press), you can't libel. Slander, sure. But libel, no.
- leetcrew 6y agoIANAL, but it's my understanding that anything written and viewed by a third party is considered "published" wrt libel. so it's already trivially easy for an ordinary person to commit libel.
- stcredzero 6y agoPress is a thing people do, not a credential people have. All people should have freedom to observe and report on (to the extent they wish or do not wish to) actions of the state. Restricting that should have severe punishment. Social media platforms, take note!
- eric_b 6y agoI'm interested to see what comes out of all this. I am very glad I do not live in Minneapolis. I did not see a specific damages amount in the complaint, but I am assuming it will be high, especially if granted class action status. Bankrupting state and city police forces probably "feels" good to a lot of people here. But what are the second and third order effects of underfunded police departments? In MN the Minneapolis city council wants to disband the police department entirely. This may be all talk, and I'm not sure if it's technically possible, but what happens if there is no police department? What are the second and third order effects of that? Is having no law enforcement a better outcome for the residents? My initial reaction is "no". When confronted with videos of people rioting, looting and vandalising most respond that "it's only a few bad apples, the vast majority are peaceful". Is it not true that most cops are OK too? I'm honestly asking. Yes there are some problem cops - Chauvin obviously having a long history of issues. But are we really saying that the majority of cops are bad actors? It feels like with emotions so hot right now, people are willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I am skeptical that is the right course of action.
- loopz 6y agoPolice behaviour and processes are systemic. They're supposed to use right strategies and target the "bad apples". They're also dependent on leadership.
- eric_b 6y agoI agree. The bad apples have to go. My concern is that we want to "hurt" the police rather than fix the systemic issues. It seems that the Minneapolis police department has had excessive force issues for years. That feels like a leadership failure to me. In that case you'd look at the Chief, the union rep, the Mayor and any other folks who can change the culture but don't.
- anigbrowl 6y agoReformists have had decades to work in and the outcome is that we just see more impunity, more hardware, and more money spent on policing to the detriment of all other social services. The approach has failed dismally and it's time to take a more drastic approach.
- c3534l 6y agoJust earlier this month, protestors a stat over adorned rifles and threatened the governor. This time, the police are ready to teargas and beat anyone for any reason. The response doesn't seem the same. They've turned protests into riots.
- cutemonster 6y ago(is there a typo? What does: "protestors a stat over adorned rifles" mean)
- Fezzik 6y agoa stat(e) over, an adjacent State.
- mberning 6y agoI don’t remember them starting any fires or looting any stores either.
- sonotathrowaway 6y agoI don’t remember police launching tear gas into peaceful crowds back then, nor do I remember police breaking windows, assaulting press, or vandalizing storefronts then either. I wonder why police would want to discredit protests that occur in response to their murders.
- mberning 6y agoThese mental gymnastics are incredible, and it shows how terribly mislead legacy and social media has made people. The idea that in most of these cases the police just rolled up, started shooting tear gas into crowds for no reason, and THEN the violence began is ridiculous. There are literally hours of video of protestors antagonizing the authorities as well their fellow citizens and then devolving into looting and burning entire city blocks. Most people do not want to allow this violence and destruction to go on unchecked and there are many public opinion polls coming out to back that up. Here in Cincinnati the daytime protests have been very well run in general and non violent. In the evenings are when the criminal elements come out and wreak havoc. Just the other night Walter Smith Randolph, a black reporter I might add, was reporting on the after dark riots and he and his crew were pummeled with glass bottles by criminals driving around in cars after curfew. If the police shut it down it will be called an escalation, and in fact it was derided by the usual suspects, but what else are they supposed to do? I seriously cannot understand the idea that the police should not carry these people off to jail.
- mrfusion 6y agoWouldn’t this just be a regular lawsuit? Why do you need the ACLU?
- dangus 6y agoThis...is a regular lawsuit? This is why people donate to the ACLU. So that they can do the extensive work, pay lawyers, etc.
- mrfusion 6y agoI feel like we should save ACLU resources for winning new freedoms or taking back lost freedoms. (Not that This isnt a noble cause. )
- lovegoblin 6y ago> taking back lost freedoms. Better not to lose them in the first place, though, right?
- archon 6y agoThis is part of the larger issue of the police - in Minneapolis and a lot of other places - actively resisting efforts by the public to document police actions and provide any level of accountability through those recordings. That is a freedom that needs to be defended.
- function_seven 6y agoThat's exactly what's going on here. The press has a constitutional right to report. This lawsuit alleges that the police violated that right. And not just once, but systemically. Now they're suing to take back that lost freedom. If they don't, then what's to stop this continuing to be the norm? I can't think of a clearer example of what the ACLU exists to do.
- gruez 6y agoMaybe because those people can't otherwise afford a lawyer to sue the city/state?
- mehrdadn 6y agoMan, this seems like such an uphill battle. I feel like unless they can show police were trying to deliberately target the press rather than just treating them like any other members of the public, they'll have that much more difficult of a time getting past qualified immunity and winning a lawsuit.
- TallGuyShort 6y agoI agree with you this probably won't be easy. But the video of the CNN arrest is quite damning in my non-lawyer opinion. They had press credentials. They clearly and calmly identify themselves as press. They clearly and calmly state that they will move back to wherever the police want them. They are arrested 1 by 1 over the course of several minutes.
- anewdirection 6y agoThe CNN arrest was not violent, not were they held long. The reporter later said everyone was nice, and they had orders to arrest anyone in the path of the crowd who did not immediately disperse. If there is an example of the police acting badly, or treating press differently, this is not it.
- dharmab 6y agoThey were released quickly because the president of CNN was on the phone with the Governor of Minnesota within minutes. https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/29/politics/tim-walz-minnesota-cnn-arrest/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/29/politics/tim-walz-minnesota-c...
- thephyber 6y agoUnfortunately, I don't think this comment should be voted down. I suspect it's exactly the orders police are given when the order to disperse a crowd/protest is given.
- colejohnson66 6y ago
- fallingfrog 6y agoI’m pretty sure the problem of police abusing their power is never going away, so long as we have policing in its current form rather than some sort of unarmed or lightly armed community helpers. The reason they are always equipped with lethal weapons and so quick to use them is that their role is mostly to protect the people who have property from the people who don’t. And in America that’s always going to have a racial element. Black people in America are mostly still used as cheap labor- human capital stock. Unless they are willing to start redistributing wealth away from the super wealthy towards the least wealthy the ruling strata will always have to use violence to maintain order. And that means journalists too. That is why if you want to highlight who is holding the real power and address the issues of inequality, the best place to start is to attack the police directly. Because it’s something that they are structurally unable to fix without fixing a whole bunch of other stuff first, and it places the focus right in the center of where the violence is coming from. It forces a confrontation by making a demand that they cannot ignore but also cannot actually address.
- anewdirection 6y agoBeing armed does not matter, unchecked power matters. I could care less if they carried ak47s as long as they used them more sparingly. Disarming the police might have more effect on how interactions happen, but is not the problem, nor a very workable solution where citizens have the right to be armed. The police are bound by laws. Attacking them is not helpful. If the police are bad, the laws are bad, and/or not being enforced. The history of mandatory sentancing laws (funny enough brought forward by none other than Joe Biden) might as well be the soundtrack for police racism over the last 20 years.
- bigiain 6y ago> The police are bound by laws. This is evidently not true.
- smileysteve 6y ago> I'm pretty sure the problem of police abusing their power is never going away The next handful of years is going to be interesting. Between civil forfeiture, marijuana decriminalization, self driving cars (and for the shorter term, coronavirus reduced driving) - police departments will be losing a significant amount of their current income streams; especially if unemployment returns back to its lows. Everybody looks at automation in the food or retail industries; or health administration and insurance; but we have a police and prison system designed with illegal marijuana; that could shrink to 1/8th of it's size with relatively few changes in laws (drug law repeal, mandatory minimums, crime act).
- williesleg 6y agoWho can we use for all the wonton destruction? Hello? Anybody?
- Attained 6y agoSo what can anyone actually do to fix this? Protesting has no lasting effect, and contacting my senator/politicians is a joke since I'm in the political minority.
- kaycebasques 6y ago> Protesting has no lasting effect, and contacting my senator/politicians is a joke since I'm in the political minority. Have you tried either or are you assuming?
- Attained 6y agoI'm just saying what it looks like to me after the last 10 years of police brutality and protests
- GaryNumanVevo 6y agoThe Civil Rights Act was passed after 6 days of protests
- jonlucc 6y agoProtesting can have a lasting effect. There are small changes happening all over the country already. In my city, the mayor has requested a total overhaul of the police use of force policy within 14 days. In another city, the mayor (who doesn't control the local police for weird reasons) has called an out-of-cycle meeting of the police board to address poor behavior by officers during the protests and to change policies. Over the past couple of nights, lots of cities have changed how they deal with large protests, backing off; its too soon to know if those tactical changes will revert in a week, a year, a month, or at all. At the federal level, there are a few bills being introduced to deal with qualified immunity or other aspects that need addressing. These may not go anywhere, but more pressure may have an effect on that. Also, hopefully next time there's a massive economic downturn, officials remember that not supporting individuals makes the whole nation a powder keg, ready to spawn riots in all 50 states. There's also historic precedent that protesting has a lasting change.
- r0m4n0 6y agoWe are well past the point of being capable of recording all police interactions with video. If every police officer was forced to record all activity with body cams (that would be made public through some process) we could scrutinize and hold every interaction accountable by the laws that already exist. That wouldn’t solve everything immediately but I think over time every action would take place as if there was public oversight. Even during these protests we have instances of people being shot by the police and conflicted recollections from both sides of the events that took place. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/03/david-mcatee-police-say-videos-show-louisville-man-fired-gun/3133406001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/03/david-... Record everything and hold everyone accountable for their own actions.
- yters 6y agoAt least from the video, the press is walking into zones of active conflict between protestors and police with lots of noise and police in full riot gear. Personally, it is not super suprising to me the press gets caught in the cross fire.
- bigiain 6y agoI note there's no widely circulating videos or reports of journalists being assaulted by demonstrators... I suspect there's way less "cross" in that "cross fire" than the term you're using implies.
- yters 6y agoYes, journalists would be considered to be one of the demonstrators by both parties. They are not geared out like the riot police, so do not look similar.
- bigiain 6y agoAt the same time, it's inconceivable that a journalist could be mistaken for a rioting, window breaking, projectile throwing looter. Which says something important about where the riot-gear-clad police are aiming their "cross fire". (And hence why the protests are needed, and why some of the protesters become violent after a few generations of the same old same old...)
- yters 6y agoyes, i am not saying police are justified but it isn't clear at least from the video, police are going out of their way to shut down the press, as in they have a press vendetta or want to censor which is the impression i got was going on based on the headline and linked article i accept i may just lack reading comprehension
- amaccuish 6y agoYes and we shouldn't have journalists in war zones either /s
- zargon 6y agoI fully support the ACLU in these lawsuits. However, their last paragraph states "If the government refuses to hold its officers accountable for their unlawful actions, we will." But suing the state doesn't result in accountability for the officers. It punishes the taxpayers. The perpetrators of these crimes never see any fallout from them. If we want real change, police officers have to experience personal consequences for their actions.
- rayiner 6y agoPunishing the taxpayers is fine. At the end of the day, they’re the ones who elect the officials who hire the police chiefs.
- Aperocky 6y agoThis is one of the unspoken truth of democracy. Democracy reflect the people, if the people sucks, the democracy will also suck. This is a feature not a bug.
- zargon 6y agoI agree it's fine, and needs to happen. Let's not pretend that it enforces any accountability on the officers involved in this suit. (Which is what the quote says. As interpret it, anyway.) It's just a tiny part of what needs to happen.
- raincom 6y agoIn today's interview with Times, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey said he doesn't have power to change police union contracts. So, something rotten out there. Best option for Minneapolis is to disband the police force just like Camden, NJ did. For more, check https://www.startribune.com/here-s-why-cops-can-t-be-held-accountable/570998142/ https://www.startribune.com/here-s-why-cops-can-t-be-held-ac...
- MertsA 6y ago>Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey said he doesn't have power to change police union contracts. At this point screw the fallout from the police union. Rip it up and renegotiate if the existing contractual obligations are too restricting. Realistically whatever recourse the union might have for breach of contract would be worth it. The most damaging action they could take would be to strike, and if they did public support would be against the police at this point and that would be a boon to appeasing the protesters. Heck, make it a PR stunt and start a campaign to get protesters to enroll in the police academy and fix the injustices they're marching for. Either the PD gets replaced wholesale and the union can pound sand and the protesters are appeased or the union comes back to the table to come up with a reasonable deal that lets the municipality make some real changes to appease the protesters. Regardless of how they proceed serious accountability is crucial.
- dgzl 6y agoI think people are missing a few big points. 1) It's extremely difficult being a cop 2) It's extremely terrifying being a cop 3) It's extremely unpopular being a cop It boggles me every time I hear people say cops need "stricter requirements" and "less pay" but never hear anyone volunteering to join the force and make real change. Look around, how many white knights want to be a cop? The videos from Thursday/Friday night Minneapolis shape my framework for these riots, not the supposed abuse to protesters and reporters. IMO, given the circumstances, the cops overall have been very civil while taking an onslaught of verbal and even physical abuse. And don't get me wrong, I'm not ignoring police abuse and brutality. https://youtu.be/cHcELsLF7cg https://youtu.be/cHcELsLF7cg
- aetimmes 6y agoI think you underestimate just how wildly the police will protect their institution in defense of a perceived threat. Joining the force is not the path to change; dissenters in the ranks get punished personally and professionally in defense of the blue wall. It's unpopular to be a cop because by and large, cops have a tremendous deal of power (compared to an average citizen) and very little keeping them in check. With great power comes great responsibility, so the saying goes.
- dgzl 6y agoI couldn't imagine someone being against a police Union and also supporting civilian unions. They serve the same purpose. I also can't imagine a sane person thinking we don't need the police, unless you're also supporting a highly armed population (which, I am.) > With great power comes great responsibility, so the saying goes. So you acknowledge that it's difficult, terrifying, unpopular and requires great reasonability, but offer nothing for a solution. What good is your comment? The police job is more stress than any content moderator on social media, because the police are living the content that gets moderated. They're subjected to immense violence because average citizens need protection from criminals. Once again, do you have any decent solution or do you plan to just add to the stress of this critical and thankless job?
- 6y ago