Home » About » Newsletters » June 2000
ACLU of Florida Case Updates
Secret Evidence (Al-Najjar v. Reno): U.S. District Court Judge Joan A. Lenard is expected to decide shortly whether to release 42-year-old Dr. Mazen Al-Najjar from a Bradenton jail where he has been detained by the INS for nearly three years on the basis of secret evidence he has yet to see or challenge. Dr. Al-Najjar is represented by a team of attorneys from the ACLU of Florida, the Nationalities Service Center, and the Center for Constitutional Rights. Prof. David Cole of the Georgetown University Law Center is lead attorney in the case.
A two-hour hearing was held in federal court on April 14 on a petition for habeas corpus filed on Dr. Al-Najjar's behalf. At that hearing, Dr. Al-Najjar's attorneys argued that holding him indefinitely without giving him the opportunity to defend himself violates his constitutional rights.
Dr. Al-Najjar is alleged to have connections to the Palestine Islamic Jihad. Although he has never been charged with criminal activity, government attorneys cited case law at the hearing to show they can jail him on evidence that has neither been presented to Dr. Al-Najjar nor his attorneys. Judge Lenard, who had not reviewed the evidence against him prior to the hearing, said she will rule after further consideration of the statutory and constitutional questions raised.
School Vouchers (Bush v. Holmes): At a hearing on March 14, 2000 to address the constitutionality of the "Opportunity Scholarship Program" ("OSP") - commonly referred to as the voucher program - Leon County Circuit Court Judge L. Ralph Smith found Florida's voucher plan to be unconstitutional. In his 17-page decision, Judge Smith stated the program, which uses tax dollars to fund private and parochial school tuition, violates Article IX, Section 1, of the Florida Constitution, which requires the state to provide for "a uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of free public schools...." Shortly after the court's decision, attorneys for the state filed an appeal, claiming the judicial proceedings at the district court level were so tainted with "legal errors" that they were unable to receive a fair trial. Such action on behalf of the state prevents the courts from enforcing Judge Smith's order and gives the state legal authority to continue implementing the program until further appellate review. Although attorneys for the legal team challenging vouchers, which includes the ACLU of Florida and several teachers' unions, filed a motion asking the Florida Supreme Court to hear the case, the District Court of Appeal on April 11 denied their request. On May 2, after hearing evidence from both sides as to whether the scholarship program should be temporarily halted, Judge Smith denied the plaintiff's motion to vacate the automatic stay, allowing the scholarship program and judicial process to continue until an appellate court decides the issue.
Workplace Drug Testing (Baron v. City of Hollywood): In a victory for public employees' privacy rights, U.S. District Court Judge Kenneth L. Ryskamp on April 4 struck down the City of Hollywood's Drug and Alcohol Abuse Policy as unconstitutional, asserting that suspicionless drug testing violates government employees' Fourth Amendment rights. Under the city's former drug policy, new employees were subject to mandatory urine drug testing even in the absence of reasonable suspicion that the employee is using or has used drugs. In this case, the policy in question was ruled unconstitutional and overbroad because it applied to applicants for all positions with the City of Hollywood, without taking into consideration the particular job classifications - namely whether they were "safety-sensitive" positions such as, say, bus drivers, construction workers, and police officers.
Thomas Baron, the plaintiff in the case, began working for a temporary accounting agency hired by the City of Hollywood in 1997. Shortly after his three-month period of temporary employment, he was offered employment by the City of Hollywood. But Baron refused to take the drug test, so in January 1999, two years after he initially began working for the city, the ACLU filed suit on his behalf seeking compensation as well as a permanent injunction to prevent the city from enforcing its policy. Trial is scheduled in June to determine damages.
Free Speech (Ohanian v. City of Miami): In a lawsuit filed on March 22, ACLU cooperating attorneys Bruce Rogow and Beverly Pohl are seeking to recover the unusually high fee of $39,000 charged to Miami concert promoter Debbie Ohanian when she produced the October 9, 1999, Los Van Van concert at the Miami Arena. The fee was imposed because of the threat of protests by anti-Cuban exiles. Ohanian is seeking a ruling that prevents the city from imposing similar fees in the future. The City of Miami filed a motion to dismiss, claiming the alleged facts are "speculative" and "fail to show that there is any real or immediate threat that [Ohanian] will be wronged again." On April 24, however, attorneys representing Ohanian responded in opposition to the city's motion to dismiss the case, which is currently pending before U.S. District Court Judge Joan A. Lenard. Within the next few months, ACLU cooperating attorneys expect to file a motion that may be dispositive in the case.
Voting Rights (Thompson v. Glades County Board of County Commissioners): ACLU's Voting Rights Project filed suit May 12 in the U.S. District Court in Ft. Myers challenging the at-large method of electing members of the Glades County Board of County Commissioners and the Glades County School Board. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of residents Billie Thompson and Patricia Brown, alleges that the present method of electing commissioners and school board members dilutes the votes of the African-American population in districts where minority voters are concentrated - in violation of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
