Fifty Years of Civil Liberties and
Civil Rights Struggles in Florida

Highlights of the American Civil Liberties Union's
Work in the Sunshine State

Protecting freedom of speech and expression and
Combating Censorship

Art censorship: The ACLU successfully represented the proprietor of Miami's Cuban art museum when officials attempted to close the museum by terminating its lease after it exhibited works by artists who were Cuban nationals. Cuban Museum of Arts and Culture v. City of Miami (S.D. Fla. 1991)

Free speech & a hostile workplace: The ACLU filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals on behalf of Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc. in an appeal of a district court decision that found a hostile work environment based on harassing conduct, but also that employees brought sexually explicit pictures and reading material to work.  The trial court ordered JSI to adopt a policy which among other things forbade: "Sexual or discriminatory displays or publications anywhere in JSI's workplace by employees, such as: (1) displaying pictures, posters, calendars, graffiti, objects, promotional materials, reading materials, or other materials that are sexually suggestive, sexually demeaning, or pornographic, or bringing into the JSI work environment or possessing any such material to read, display or view at work; and (2) reading or otherwise publicizing in the work environment materials that are in any way sexually revealing, sexually suggestive, sexually demeaning or pornographic."  The ACLU argued that the finding of liability and the injunction violated the free speech rights of the company's employees, and that the court should remand for reconsideration of whether the evidence, disregarding protected speech, was otherwise sufficient to support a finding of sexual harassment, and if so, to enter an injunction that forbade targeted sexual harassment that did not violate the free speech rights of individual employees, for example restricting what employees read during their breaks.  Robinson v. Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc. (M.D. Fla. 1991)

Free speech and rap music:  The ACLU filed an amicus brief on behalf of Luther Campbell and 2 Live Crew in their successful first amendment appeal from a federal court judgment declaring their popular album, "As Nasty As They Wanna Be" to be obscene.  The Court of Appeals held the album was artistic speech protected by the first amendment, and the U. S. Supreme Court denied review, ending Broward County Sheriff Nick Navarro's threats to arrest album sellers and the group's performers.  Luke Records, Inc. v. Navarro (11th Circuit, U. S. Court of Appeals; cert. denied U.S. Supreme Court, 1992)

Banning artist and musicians:  When City officials blocked the Cuban band Los Van Van from performing in Miami, the ACLU represented the Band's promoter and secured the Miami Arena for the concert; The ACLU also successfully ended the ban on the performances by Cuban artists in Miami-Dade County that was enforced by an Ordinance banning the use of facilities by anyone doing business with Cuba. Miami Light Project v. Miami-Dade County (S.D. Fla. 2000)

Political free speech:  The ACLU has represented numerous Cuban exile groups of various political orientations and organizations of former political prisoners (including Brigade 2056, Brothers to the Rescue, Movimiento Democracia) defending their right to protest the Castro government, U.S. policies toward Cuba or the presence of Cuban artists in Miami during the 2003 Latin Grammys in Miami.

Academic freedom: In 2006, the Florida Legislature banned travel for academic research to countries on the State Department's list of countries supporting terrorism.  The primary intent of the legislation was aimed at limiting research and travel to Cuba.  The ACLU successfully challenged the legislation; the State appealed and we are awaiting a decision by the federal appellate court. Faculty Senate of Florida International University v. Florida

Student free speech:  The ACLU represented high school student Heather Gilman, whose speech was censored by school officials. Gilman supported equal treatment and acceptance of gays and lesbians students at her high school and expressed her beliefs with phrases and symbols on her book binders and T-shirts she wore to school such as "Equal, Not Special Rights," "Gay? Fine By Me," "Gay Pride," "I Support My Gay Friends," and "God Loves Me Just the Way I Am," along with stickers showing rainbows and pink triangles. School officials banned these expressions as disruptive. Following a trial, a federal district judge ruled in Gilman's favor and cited the high school principal for engaging in a "witch hunt" against gay students. Gillman ex rel. Gillman v. School Bd. for Holmes County, Fla. (N.D. Fla. 2008)

Library book censorship: Claiming that the library book was "inaccurate," the Miami-Dade School Board banned a children's travel book, Vamos a Cuba, from school libraries.  In fact, the book did not reflect the political orthodoxy about Cuba of a majority of the School Board.  The ACLU challenged the removal as censorship, and prevailed in the trial court. On appeal, a panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed.  The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear our appeal, leaving in place the right of the School Board to remove the books from the library shelves. American Civil Liberties Union et. al. v. Miami-Dade School Board (U.S. Supreme Court 2009.)

Art and commercial speech:  In 2009, the ACLU sued the City of Clearwater on behalf of the owners of a bait and tackle shop whose marine-themed mural on the outside wall of their shop was cited as improper signage -- as was the First Amendment banner they hung over the mural to protest the City's citation. 

The District Court entered a permanent injunction, prohibiting Clearwater from banning the mural and the First Amendment banner.  Complete Angler, LLC v. City of Clearwater, Fla, (M.D. Fla. 2009)

Freedom of the Press

Arrest of newspaper editor:  When the Key West Police Chief arrested the editor of a weekly newspaper for reporting that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement was investigating the Chief, the ACLU represented the editor and got the law making it a crime to reveal any information gathered during an internal investigation declared an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment.  Following the litigation, the Police Chief resigned.  Cooper v. Dillon (11th Cir. 2005)

Religious Freedom/Separation of Church and State

Freedom of religion: The ACLU represented the Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, which practices the Santeria religion, a faith that includes ritual animal sacrifice. In 1987, the Church announced plans to establish a house of worship, a school, cultural center, and a museum in Hialeah. The announcement distressed members of the Hialeah community, who prompted the City Council to adopt resolutions and ordinances in which the City
"reiterated its commitment to prohibit all acts of any and all religious groups which are inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety."  In other words, animals could be slaughtered in the community for any reason other than a religious reason.  The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously for the Church.  Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah (U.S. Supreme Court 1993)

Bible history: The ACLU (with the law firm of Steel Hector and People For the American Way) challenged the Lee County School Board's decision to teach a class on the Bible that used a curriculum presenting Biblical stories as historical events, and had students engage in learning activities that advanced a sectarian viewpoint.  The federal District Court enjoined part of the curriculum.  The School Board eliminated the course when a revised curriculum that required a more rigorous academic study of the Bible did not attract sufficient number of students.  Gibson v. Lee County School Board (M.D. Fla. 1998)

Religious expression: The ACLU represented Christian, Catholic, Jewish and Muslim families in an unsuccessful effort in defense of religious expression by challenging the decision of the Boca Raton Municipal Cemetery to order the removal of all upright grave markers placed at the site of the graves of their loved ones. Warner v. Boca Raton (Fla. 2004)

School vouchers:  The ACLU was part of the legal team that challenged former Governor Jeb Bush's program to use tax-payer funds for vouchers to attend church-run schools.  In 2006, the Florida Supreme Court declared that the voucher ("Opportunity Scholarship") program violated the Florida Constitution.  Bush v. Holmes (Fla. 2006)

School sponsored religion: After complaints from students and parents about prayers and religious practices sponsored and led by school officials, the ACLU sued the Santa Rosa County School District.  In a rare move, the School Board admitted liability for constitutional violations and, with the ACLU, submitted a proposed consent decree to the federal district court to correct the violations.  Doe v. School Board of Santa Rosa County (May 2009)

Protecting the Right to Vote

Disfranchisement: The ACLU has led efforts to end Florida's Reconstruction Era policy of lifetime disfranchisement policy of those with felony convictions.  We formed the Florida Rights Restoration Coalition, and we have helped thousands to regain their right to vote through the Restoration of Civil Rights process.  In 2007, we secured changes in the clemency process that are a first step towards significant reforms.  While we seek to make the clemency process virtually automatic, we work for the removal of the disfranchisement provisions from the state constitution.  Until then, hundreds of thousands of citizens will be denied the most basic right in a democracy. And since many occupational licenses require ex-offenders to have their civil rights restored, these citizens will be denied the ability to earn a living and support their families, thereby increasing the likelihood of recidivism and return to prison.

Civil rights restoration:  In 2001, the ACLU (with the Florida Justice Institute and Florida Legal Services) filed suit against the Florida Department of Corrections for failing to assist inmates leaving prison with getting their civil rights restored, as required by state law.  Restoration of civil rights is required to vote and hold many occupations.  The Department admitted that it failed to assist over 125,000 released offenders in processing their civil rights restoration forms, and agreed to contact them and provide the necessary forms.  The circuit court refused to order the Department to assist inmates with civil rights restoration forms in the future.  The District Court of Appeal reversed and ordered the Department to offer assistance to about-to-be released offenders in applying to have their rights restored.  Florida Caucus of Black State Legislators v. Crosby (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) 

Absentee ballots:  On election day, November 2004, after receiving numerous calls from voters who had requested an absentee ballot but had received it too late to get back by 7 p.m. election night, a suit was filed against Broward and Miami-Dade Counties and the Secretary of State in an effort to require that ballots postmarked by election day but received up to 10 day afterwards (the same time period given to overseas voters) be counted. Following a week of extensive emergency litigation, the court denied our request for injunctive relief.   Friedman v. Snipes (S.D. Fla.)

Barriers to voter registration:  A U.S. citizen residing in Germany attempted to register to vote in the 2004 Presidential election by federal post card application. He mailed the original and faxed a copy to the Seminole County Supervisor of Elections. The County received the fax but not the original, and refused to register the applicant to vote. Suit was filed seeking emergency injunctive relief. Within hours of being served with the lawsuit, the Supervisor of Elections reversed course and registered the ACLU client and others in the same position.  De Treville v. Joyner (M.D. Fla. 2004)

Manual recounts:  Although a state statute requires a manual recount in a close or disputed election, prior to the 2004 November Election, the Secretary of State's office promulgated an administrative rule expressly forbidding a manual recount of votes cast on touch screen voting machines.  The ACLU, joined by other organizations, challenged the rule as contrary to state law. The ACLU prevailed when an Administrative Law Judge struck down the rule.  ACLU of Florida v. Florida Department of State. The state then issued an emergency rule that -- in a subsequent legal challenge brought by the Florida Democratic Party -- was narrowly upheld by the District Court of Appeal and Florida Supreme Court. Florida Democratic Party v. Hood, 884 So.2d 1148 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)

Felon purge:  In June 2004, the ACLU filed a public records request to obtain the "felon purge list," a list of more than 47,000 registered voters to be deleted from the voter rolls because the state identified them as felons.  Election officials denied the request, citing a Florida Statute that allowed political parties and candidates to copy or take notes of information on voter rolls but not the public or voting rights advocates.  The ACLU argued that it was unable to prevent eligible voters from being wrongfully purged from the rolls and assist persons inaccurately classified as ineligible to vote if it could not copy the State's list of ineligible voters.  The ACLU then intervened in a lawsuit filed by the Cable News Network (CNN), whose access to the list was also restricted by the Division of Elections.  The Court declared the statute unconstitutional noting that it did not articulate a necessity for limiting public access adding that "the right to inspect the suspected felons list without the right to copy the list is an empty right indeed and would be valueless."  Cable News Network v. Florida Dept. of State (Leon County Circuit Court, 2004)

Electronic voting machines:  The ACLU was lead counsel in the citizen lawsuit challenging the Sarasota Congressional election in which approximately 18,300 votes were not recorded on the Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines.  Fedder v. Gallagher (2nd Judicial Circuit, Leon County 2006). Using the facts in this case, the ACLU secured the support of Gov. Charlie Crist and the Legislature to ban paperless electronic voting machines that do not provide a permanent paper record of a vote in order to perform a meaningful recount if one is needed.  As a result, in the November 2008 election, every county used the optical scan voting system in which a paper ballot is read by an optical scan reader.

Protecting the Right to Privacy

Minor's access to abortion:  The ACLU submitted an amicus curiae brief in the Florida Supreme Court in the landmark case in which the Court ruled that Florida's constitutional right to privacy prohibits the State from requiring parental consent for a minor to obtain an abortion. In re: T.W. (Fla. 1989)  The ACLU also submitted an amicus brief in N. Fla. Women's Health & Counseling Servs. v. Florida (Fla. 2003), in which the Florida Supreme Court held that the state's constitutional right to privacy also prohibited the State from requiring parental notification prior to a minor obtaining an abortion.  

Physician aid in dying:  The ACLU represented Charles Hall, who acquired HIV by a blood transfusion, and his doctor Cecil McIver.  Hall requested assistance from his physician to end his life sometime in the future when the infection developed into AIDS and his medical condition degraded to the point where he no longer wished to live.  He asked the court to enjoin the State Attorney from prosecuting Dr. McIver if he helped Mr. Hall end his life.  The court found that Hall was mentally competent, in deteriorating health and terminally ill and granted the injunction based on Florida's constitutional privacy provision ("[e]very natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into his private life.) and the federal Equal Protection Clause. The court required that "the lethal medication must be self administered only after consultation and determination by both physician and patient that Mr. Hall is (1) competent, (2) imminently dying, and (3) prepared to die." The State Attorney appealed the ruling, and on July 17, 1997, the Supreme Court overturned the earlier decision, reasoning that Florida's privacy provision did not extend to this case, that the state has an interest in preventing suicide, and that the integrity of the medical profession must be preserved. Krischer v. McIver (Fla. 1997)

Parental notification to obtain an abortion:  Responding to the Florida Supreme Court's rulings upholding a woman's right to privacy, the legislature proposed and the voters approved a constitutional amendment requiring parental notification. The ACLU challenged the ballot language as misleading and thus constitutionally prohibited by Florida's Constitution to appear on the ballot. American Civil Liberties Union of Florida v. Hood (Fla. 2004). The FSC agreed, struck the ballot language drafted by the Legislature, and ordered the full text of the amendment placed on the ballot.  The amendment passed and a parental notification statute was enacted by the Legislature that included provision for a judicial bypass. The ACLU represented teens on appeals of denials of judicial bypass and in a series of published opinions, framed the standards that are applied in judicial bypass hearings.  The ACLU also created the PATH Project (Providing Access to Teen Health) which trained lawyers throughout the state to represent minors in need of a judicial bypass and referred teens needing to file a bypass petition to these lawyers.

Random drug testing:  The ACLU successfully challenged the program of the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice to require random drug tests for all agency employees, whether or not they were suspected of illicit drug use.  Wenzel v. Bankhead (N.D. Fla. 2004)

Privacy of medical records:  In 2003, law enforcement officials seized Rush Limbaugh's medical records in a criminal investigation to determine if he illegally obtained prescription pain medication from several doctors. Although officers obtained a search warrant, the ACLU argued in an amicus brief that a warrant fails to meet constitutional and statutory requirements that protect the right of privacy guaranteed by Florida's Constitution.  The ACLU argued that law enforcement officers violated state law by using the more intrusive search warrant process rather than by obtaining a subpoena (per Florida Statute § 395.3025) that requires officers to notify the person whose records they seek to obtain and provide the person an opportunity to object before the records are seized. The law, enacted by the Legislature to protect medical privacy, also gives a judge authority to release only information necessary for an investigation and to control other uses of the records. In Limbaugh's case, authorities obtained a search warrant ex parte (without notifying him or giving him an opportunity to object). The warrant permitted officers access to all his medical records, not just those relevant to the state's investigation, with no limit on how the state could use information about treatments or conditions unrelated to the criminal investigation.  The ACLU sought to defend the right to privacy of medical records for every Floridian by ensuring that the state complies with procedural protections required by the Constitution and the Legislature. Rush Limbaugh v. State of Florida (Florida Fourth DCA 2004) (amicus curiae)

Access to abortion:  When a severely disabled woman in the state's care was raped and became pregnant, Governor Jeb Bush and the Department of Children & Families sought the appointment of a guardian for the fetus. The trial court denied the appointment and the petitioner appealed. The ACLU submitted an amicus brief both at the trial court and the DCA.  (The DCA denied our motion to participate.) Once oral argument was set and it became apparent that no party was arguing in support of the trial court's decision, the ACLU re-submitted the brief with an emergency request to participate. The motion was granted and the ACLU Legal Director argued the case 4 days later. On January 9, 2004, the Court upheld the denial of a guardian for the fetus in a 2-1 decision.  A dissenting opinion called for the overturning of Roe v. Wade.  In re: J.D.S. (Florida Fifth DCA 2004)

The Theresa Schiavo end-of-life controversy:  The ACLU played a critical role in the prolonged bitter legal battle over Theresa Schiavo's right to forego life-prolonging medical procedures. There had been six years of litigation with nine applications to the District Court of Appeal resulting in four reported decisions; three applications to the Florida Supreme Court, all of which denied. Three suits were filed in federal court with an application to the U.S. Supreme Court, which was denied. With all appeals exhausted, the trial court entered an order directing the guardian to remove the nutrition and hydration tubes, which were removed on October 15, 2003.

On October 21, 2003, Gov. Jeb Bush signed into law a statute giving the Governor authority "to issue a one-time stay to prevent the withholding of nutrition and hydration from a patient if, as of October 15, 2003," the patient "has no written advance directive," "the court has found that patient to be in a persistent vegetative state," "that patient has had nutrition and hydration withheld," and "a member of that patient's family has challenged the withholding of nutrition and hydration."  Gov. Bush then issued Executive Order 03-201 staying the withholding of artificial nutrition and hydration and ordering "all medical facilities and personnel providing medical care for Theresa Schiavo... to immediately provide nutrition and hydration to Theresa Schiavo." He directed the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to serve the order on the facility caring for Mrs. Schiavo. On October 21, 2003, against the court's order and her wishes as found by the court, Mrs. Schiavo was subjected to surgical reinsertion of a feeding tube.  The ACLU, representing her guardian and husband Michael Schiavo, challenged the statute and the Governor's actions. After four appeals to the DCA, the Florida Supreme Court declared the act unconstitutional.  Schiavo v. Bush (Pinellas County Circuit Court; Florida Supreme Court)

Then the President and Congress entered the controversy.  Over a weekend, late at night, Congress passed and the President signed extraordinary legislation granting the federal district court in Florida jurisdiction to consider any claim regarding the withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration without regard to any prior state court decision. Schiavo's parents and brother (the Schindlers) filed suit at 3 a.m. on March 21, seeking to re-insert the tubes. An emergency hearing was held that evening, and early in the morning the court denied the TRO. An immediate appeal was taken to the 11th Circuit, and on March 23 a panel affirmed the trial court. A petition for re-hearing before the entire Appeals Court was denied later that evening. A petition for review by the U.S. Supreme Court was filed that night, with ACLU's response due 8 a.m. the next morning. The Supreme Court denied review 2 hours later on March 24.

The Schindlers filed an amended complaint and sought a TRO based on new claims. A hearing was held that evening and a TRO was denied the next morning. An appeal was filed and rejected by a panel of the 11th Circuit. A petition for rehearing en banc was denied, and the Supreme Court denied review. Theresa Marie Schiavo died on March 31, 2005. Schiavo v. Schiavo (MD Fla., 11th Circuit, U.S. Supreme Court)         

Criminal Justice, Due Process and Police Practices

Wrongful conviction:  ACLU attorneys represented Freddie Pitts and Wilbert Lee, who spent 19 years on Florida's death Row, following their wrongful conviction of the 1963 robbery and murders of two white gas station attendants in Port St. Joe in Florida's Panhandle. While no physical evidence linked them to the deaths, the prosecution used the confessions that were beaten out of them, and the testimony of an alleged eyewitness. The defendants also suffered from having incompetent defense counsel.  A few weeks after they were sentenced to death, a white man arrested for another gas station robbery confessed to the murder for which Pitts and Lee were convicted. When he learned of this confession, the local sheriff said: "I already got two niggers waiting for the chair in Raiford for those murders." A polygraph examiner who had heard the white man confess took the matter to the press, and a new trial was ordered, at which Lee and Pitts were again convicted. They were pardoned by Gov. Reuben Askew in 1975.

Barring double jeopardy:  The ACLU represented Joseph Waller (later Omali Yeshitela) who, as an act of civil disobedience during a demonstration protesting the inequitable distribution of a grant to the City of St. Petersburg from the federal government, tore down a mural at City Hall that depicted African-Americans in degrading caricatures.  Waller was prosecuted under a municipal ordinance and convicted. The state then prosecuted him under a more severe state statute for the same event, obtaining a conviction and a five year sentence.  We appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which held that the prohibition against double jeopardy barred a second trial on criminal charges for the same offense. Waller v. Florida (U.S. Supreme Court 1970)

Access to the courts:  Pinellas County High School student Mark Howlett turned to the ACLU when his automobile was illegally searched by a school vice principal.  The school district claimed it was immune from lawsuits alleging violation of civil rights.  The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that a state-law sovereign immunity defense is not available to a school board in a federal civil rights action brought in a state court when such defense would not be available if the action were brought in federal court. This victory made it clear that governmental agencies could be sued for violation of civil rights in state courts.  Howlett v. Rose (U.S. Supreme Court 1990)

Criminalizing homelessness:  In 1988, the ACLU filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of approximately 6,000 homeless persons living in Miami.  Police routinely arrested the homeless for engaging in essential life sustaining activities (sleeping and eating) in public places and destroyed their personal property, including clothing, books, medicine and shelter.  Methodical sweeps of the homeless were instituted, particularly before high profile nationally televised events such as the Orange Bowl.  In 1991, U.S. District Judge C. Clyde Atkins found that the City's practices violated constitutional provisions.  He ordered a series of safe zones in which the homeless could exist without police harassment. After two appeals by the City, the U.S. Court of Appeals ordered the parties to enter into mediation.  After two-and-a-half years of intensive mediation, the ACLU and the City entered into a settlement under which each homeless person who was arrested at any time since 1988 or who had his or her property destroyed by Miami police officers during that time received $1,500 in compensation.  A protocol was instituted governing how police officers interact with homeless persons, under which the Miami Police Department now operates, and which is regarded as a model for other cities.  A special fund was set-up with the remaining funds to help homeless people with housing, rent, utilities, etc. Pottinger v. City of Miami, (S.D. Fla. 1992, granting injunctive relief); (11th Cir. 1996, referring case to mediation)

Citizen oversight of law enforcement:  Following a series of shootings of unarmed persons by Miami police officers, the federal indictment of a dozen officers and the conviction of six officers for planting weapons to cover-up the shootings, the ACLU (working with the NAACP, Brothers of the Same Mind and PULSE) drafted and campaigned for a Charter amendment to create a strong Civilian Investigative Panel. The Charter Amendment was overwhelmingly approved by the voters in 2001.  A similar proposal was rejected by the voters in Fort Myers in 2009, though the City Council adopted a civilian review board, but one lacking subpoena power.

Secret evidence:  Dr. Mazen Al Najjar, a University of South Florida professor of Palestinian origin who resided in the United States since 1981, was detained for over 3 1/2 years on the basis of secret evidence that he never had an opportunity to confront or rebut. As a result of the ACLU's litigation, he was released in December 2000, but the government continued its appeal of the district court order that led to his release.  Following an affirmance of an outstanding order of deportation, the government again took Al Najjar into custody.  After six months of detention, the ACLU filed another habeas petition in the district court. Through the efforts of Dr. Al Najjar's family, Lebanon agreed to accept him, and he was deported and reunited with his family, and ultimately accepted a teaching position in South Africa.  With the deportation, all pending actions became moot and this ugly chapter in America's justice system came to a close.  Mazen Al Najjar v. Ashcroft (U.S. District Court, S.D. Fla.; 11th Cir., 2002)

Denial of First Amendment freedoms:  The ACLU filed seven lawsuits challenging excessive force by law enforcement agencies during the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) conference held in Miami in November 2003.  Police shot a photographer in the head with a stun gun, ignored permits, destroyed property, denied labor unions and others the right to protest, and illegally arrested peaceful protestors.  The ACLU won compensation for the violation of constitutional rights for several victims.

Excessive use of force:  The ACLU challenged Miami's failure to train police officers to deal with mentally ill individuals with whom they come in contact. The case involved the shooting death of a homeless, Vietnam veteran who allegedly threatened police with a pocket knife. Officers followed the man for several blocks, using techniques known to make matters worse with mentally ill suspects. Ultimately he was shot 14 times when the police failed to dislodge the knife from his hand and he made a threatening gesture with the knife. The police chief had been warned by a county court judge about the City's failure to implement a program for handling mentally ill suspects. A settlement for the family of the individual was reached. Duff v. City of Miami, Florida (S.D. Fla. 2004)

Secret dockets:  In a criminal case, defense attorneys discovered sealed documents in their client's case and in several related cases listing individuals who would be witnesses in their client's trial. They also discovered entire cases that were sealed and did not appear on the public record.  Following conviction, an appeal was taken.  The ACLU filed an amicus brief arguing that the Southern District of Florida's procedures for the filing of documents under seal and the secret docket runs afoul of the public's limited constitutional right of access to criminal proceedings. The Court reaffirmed that trial courts cannot use secret docketing procedures that were explicitly declared unconstitutional in a prior case. U.S. v. Ochoa (11th Circuit Court of Appeals,2005)(amicus curiae)

Sex offender residency restrictions:  The ACLU challenged Miami-Dade County's Ordinance prohibiting registered sex offenders from residing within 2,500 feet of a school.  We argue that the State's comprehensive scheme for tracking and monitoring released sex offenders, which includes a 1,000-ft residency restriction, preempts local ordinances.  The Ordinance prevents released offenders from finding suitable housing on their own or with family members and created a shantytown of released sex offenders living under the Julia Tuttle Causeway in Miami.  The residency restriction has made the community less safe by creating reason for offenders to abscond and making the job of tracking and monitoring released offenders more difficult.  Exile v. Miami Dade County (11th Judicial Circuit), on appeal to the 3rd DCA.

Equal protection of the Laws

Protection from discrimination:  Working with our principal coalition partner, SAVE Dade, the ACLU played a major role in preventing the 2002 effort to repeal Miami Dade County's Human Rights Ordinance.  In 2009, the ACLU also played a leading role with coalition partners to prevent the repeal of Gainesville's Human Rights Ordinance.                  

Rights of gay and lesbian students:  The ACLU won lawsuits in Nassau and Okeechobee Counties defending the right of gay and lesbian students to form Gay Straight Alliances to fight harassment and discrimination and to discuss problems they face as gay students in the public schools. Gay Straight Alliance v. Nassau County School District; Gay-Straight Alliance v. Okeechobee County School District (2002)

Adoption ban:  The ACLU has led efforts to end Florida's 30-year discriminatory ban on adoptions by gay men and lesbians.  In lawsuits and our work in the Legislature, we have argued that the ban is unconstitutional and harms children in need of a permanent and stable home, but who are trapped by this policy in the state's troubled foster care system.  In 2008, a Miami Dade Circuit Judge declared the law unconstitutional, allowing Martin Gill to adopt the two brothers for whom he has provided the only stable home they have known.  The Attorney General appealed; a ruling from the Third District Court of Appeal is expected soon.  In Re Minor Children, (11th Judicial Circuit), on appeal to the 3rd DCA