Heard of the First Amendment?

ACLU backs Gloucester residents in removal case

Staff Report
News Tips: [email protected]

The ACLU of Virginia and the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression today filed an amicus brief in the Virginia Supreme Court on behalf of 40 Gloucester residents who were ordered to pay a total of $80,000 in fees after they attempted to use an obscure Virginia law to remove from office four members of the county’s board of supervisors. The brief claims that the sanctions chill the First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

“Certainly, the First Amendment protects the right of citizens to use the law made available to them by legislators to remove public officials from office,” said ACLU of Virginia Executive Director Kent Willis. “This is basic participation in the political process.”

Under Virginia law, citizens who have collected signatures from 10 percent of the voters in the relevant political jurisdiction may ask a court to remove elected officials who are abusing their office. After several Gloucester supervisors were indicted on criminal charges last year, the 40 citizens began collecting signatures for a removal petition, which they presented to the Gloucester County Circuit Court in the fall of 2008.

Judge Westbrook Parker dismissed the case and assessed fees after ruling that the petitioners were politically motivated.

The judge’s ruling spurred state legislators into action. In the 2009 General Assembly, lawmakers unanimously amended the statute to prohibit judges from fining or imposing fees on citizens who exercise their right to use Virginia’s law on removal of public officials from office. Lawmakers later rejected attempts by the Governor to weaken the bill by amending it to allow some limited situations in which fines or fees could be imposed.

Under the new law, which took effect on July 1, removal petitions may not be thrown out of court because of minor technical flaws, and persons who sign or circulate petitions cannot be liable for any costs associated with removal proceedings, including attorney fees and court costs, and may not have sanctions imposed against them (See § 24.2-235 and § 24.2-238).

“Lawmakers spoke loudly and clearly once they saw that the judge had misinterpreted the law in a manner that infringed on the First Amendment,” added Willis. “The General Assembly has recognized that the government has no interest in punishing citizens for their civic engagement.”

A copy of the amicus brief can be found online at: http://www.acluva.org/docket/pleadings/gloucesteramicus.pdf.