Woman Sues Over Anti-Bush Car Sticker

Ga. Nurse Sues After Being Ticketed For Obscene Anti-Bush Bumper Sticker

(AP)  A woman who was ticketed for having an obscene anti-President George W. Bush bumper sticker filed a lawsuit in federal court Monday against a county in the state of Georgia and its officials.

Denise Grier, 47, of Athens, Georgia, got a $100 ticket in March after a police officer in DeKalb County, which is in the suburbs of Atlanta, spotted the bumper sticker, which read "I'm Tired Of All The BUSH--."

Although a DeKalb judge threw out the ticket in April because the state's lewd bumper sticker law that formed the basis for the ticket was ruled unconstitutional in 1990, Grier is seeking damages for "emotional distress" against the county, according to the lawsuit.

Grier also seeks a declaration in federal court that her bumper sticker is considered protected speech under the constitutional right to free speech because she is "uncertain and insecure regarding her right to display her bumper sticker in DeKalb County," the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia.

"This type of sarcasm in relation to political figures is as old as the country," said her attorney, Frank Derrickson. "We think this bumper sticker is just the latest example of this. We want to be assured that not just Ms. Grier but anyone who wants to have fun with the powers that be should be able to do that under the First Amendment."

DeKalb County spokeswoman Kristie Swink said she could not comment on pending litigation.

Grier, a nurse who works at Emory University and other hospitals, also is seeking punitive damages against the DeKalb police officer who gave her the ticket because he "acted with reckless disregard" of her rights, the lawsuit said.

The state law prohibited lewd or profane stickers and decals on vehicles.

Derrickson said Grier still has the anti-Bush bumper sticker on her car.

"I think she's got better ones than that, at least the ones that I saw," he said.

[huskerarmy]

"Just saw a guy walking down the street yesterday with a t-shirt that said, "I may not be Mr. Right but I will f*** you until he comes along." Yes, the word was spelled out. Isn't that special! Is this a first amendment right? The right of the one to offend outrules the rights of the many not to be offended. Way to go ACLU!"

The GOP has flourished on just this kind of bait and switch. The sticker in the story does not use profanity but rather alludes to it. Nevertheless, where do we draw the line? Who decides what is offensive? If one truely believes in a market place of ideas, then let the public decide. If no one wants to buy this kind of merchandise, they won't. People can buy the smut if they choose but the majority will reject it. This is not something for Big Brother to decide. You can not legislate all things to be nicey nice. Unfortunately, for some, living in a free society means having to endure the presence of those who are different, sometimes distastful and often disagree with you.

[huskerarmy]

Fascism - A government or party lead by a dictator emphasizing aggressive nationalism and often racism.

Such a party would be opposed to the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act. Such a party would invade another country with little to no support from the world community. Such a party would out a CIA agent, wiretap without a warrant or lie to go to war if it were in their view good of the state. Such a party would enhance the rules to give every advantage to the elite. Any idea why the Bushies might want to throw that label around so much? Is that projection perhap?

[thekjb-2009]

I love how anybody that doesn't get on their knees and worship at the love muscle of George W. Bush and his pals is somehow a "neo-fascist". A cop who is an obvious Bush supporter pulls over someone for no other reason that having an obvious difference of political opinion and snaps out a $100 ticket. I'd like to see how many tickets he wrote to people sporting "obscene" stickers about Clinton. Yet somehow the woman getting the ticket is a fascist. I guess all the rape victims were asking for it by wearing those tight clothes and going out in public being all enticingly female. This doesn't need an ACLU lawsuit but it deserves more than just an apology from the cop. It is a classic example of misuse of authority and the guy should lose his job. As citizens, we need to take this kind of abuse VERY seriously and those who abuse the public trust should be dealt with VERY harshly. He shouldn't be able to police more than the parking lot of the 7-11.

[sc1958]

The ticket was wrong. The law suit is also wrong. Get an apology from the cop and call it a day. Just saw a guy walking down the street yesterday with a t-shirt that said, "I may not be Mr. Right but I will f*** you until he comes along." Yes, the word was spelled out. Isn't that special! Is this a first amendment right? The right of the one to offend outrules the rights of the many not to be offended. Way to go ACLU!

[janemcgreeve]

typical democratic neo-fascist crybaby.

Will someone please get Missy Grier a warm bottie?

[pakaal]

Optimas2, you're correct in saying that Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus. What you forgot to mention was that the Supreme Court ruled that unconstitutional. As true then as it is now....

[huskerarmy]

Optimus,

There are many of us waiting and hoping for the day that our country truely lives up to it's promise of a free and open "marketplace of ideas." The fact that we have yet to do so is a defective argument against doing so...

[osidebear]

Optimas2 makes a dangerous argument when he defends the government for showing up at a protest rally. He urges people not to protest publicly so as to avoid government notice. When we start censoring our expression, privately or publicly, for fear the government may listen AND THEN RETALIATE, we have truly lost our freedoms.

That said, I have no issue with the woman filing this lawsuit. I'm sure she suffered emotional distress at the hands of a politically-motivated overzealous police officer. Perhaps this lawsuit, especially if it should prove successful, will motivate police departments to educate their employees on what constitutes protected political speech.

[chaoszen]

Agnim,

So now I am to believe that anyone who utters a four letter word or displays one in public is the product of a deranged mind? And that the excercise of personnel freedom is "pushing your luck". And then to invoke the spectre of "contamination of children" as some sort of twisted reason to suspend freedom of speech? This is completely unreasonable. And the reason why people of conscience should always be aware of those who would take us down the path of fascism.

[agnim]

Nikosk1

You made good observations, but bad conclusion.

It is because we the adults have invented the profanities for the children that we need to cease and desist in order to bring more dignity and more civility to our children. We might just get less danger from them in their schools.

And, it is this foolish and puny woman is 'making an example' of her insane self, if she is 'emotionally distressed' over wanting to feel free to do her chitting in public and continue the contamination of the children.

Also, it wasn't like her case wasn't thrown out ..... unfortunately? But that victory was not enough for this undignified broad. She wants to show that she has 'balls' by pushing her luck.

Now, if this new judge have any common sense with this frivolous law suit, this 'emotionally distressed' woman would be made to get professional help for her obviously deranged mind.

[optimas2]

Chaos,

I agree that some form of vigilence is necessary, and although I object to some of the steps taken by the Administration, I think that others are fairly rational, especially during what amounts to wartime--even if this concept of wartime is different than in the past.

Cicero reminds us that "inter arma enim silent leges." Throughout our nation's history, wartime has resulted in suspended or lessened civil liberties, be it the Revolutionary war, the Civil War, World War II, or Vietnam. In each situation, however, liberties were always fully restored once the threat was removed.

I think you are right, though, that this siutation requires special vigilence because of the unique nature of the war in which we find ourselves. It may very well be an extended conflict and it may very well be never-ending. If this is the case, we must be watchful that our society doesn't become Oceania: using a never-ending war against shifting opponents as justification for all actions taken by the government.

Thankfully, I think we're a long way from this scenario, and, for the time being, I'm willing to accept the unspoken promise--that has been given since time immemorial--that wartime requires special compromises and once the threat is lifted, normalcy will resume.

[chaoszen]

Optimus2,

I agree that we are for the moment about as free as we have been in the past. Our system of government when the checks and balances work properly is about as good as it gets. But I submit that we must remain vigilant in order to secure our freedom. The current administration is attempting to "load" the executive branch with supreme power. Using fear as the vehicle. This is reprehensible. And my hope is that those responsible for shredding the constitution and lying to those that they serve will ultimately be held accountable and brought to justice.

[optimas2]

Chaos,

Be that as it may, the Alien and Sedition Act passed Congress and was used to prosecute people and people were, in fact, convicted. This notion that the Founding Fathers were free-wheeling libertarians that advocated a totally free society is certainly viewing history through rose-colored glasses.

Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and imprisoned countless folks without trial--including members of the Maryland state legislature--for advocating pro-secessionist views.

Fact is that, despite the First Amendment, our country has a long history of punishing people for political speech. Whether you like it or not, right now is about as free as we've ever been, and by and large, that's a good thing.

[omergarland]

I personally have to agree with the person who said that you cannot proclaim America as the land of the free, until you can defend the rights of the man who stands on his soapbox screaming, at the top of his lungs, that which you would spend a lifetime on your soapbox ranting against. When you can do that, then you can call America the land of the free.

[agnim]

If this puny woman is really suffering 'emotional distress' over this non-issue, then the judge should demand that she seek professional help at her own expense, report back to him when she's cured, and pay for wasting courtroom time with yet another frivolous law suit.

Adults are selfish, myopic and irresponsible when they do not take into consideration the bad lessons they are providing the children in the society when they take their ******** public.

She already got off the hook by having her borderline profanity thrown out of court; but this witch is not satisfied if she is not allowed to ram her *** down the minds of the young.

There are other ways to display displeasure against bad leaders besides giving the children bad social/civic lessons.

And oh, she should be investigated to see if she uses profanity with children she may has at home and be charged if found guilty of stressing the emotional well being of a minor.

[chaoszen]

Hmmm. This womans first amendment rights were violated. And the discussion digresses into vitriol about if she should or should not have filed a lawsuit? Of course she should. That's one good way to stop that sort of thing from happening in the future. As far as the Alien and Sedition Act goes it expired in 1801 and was never tested in the Supreme Court, but is generally agreed that it was unconstitutional. Funny thing is.. Jefferson, who opposed it was a Republican. Imagine that?

[optimas2]

Jetauma,

So the government showed up at a war protest rally? What's the problem with that?

Here's a shocker: when you make public speeches, people listen, including the government. If you wish your communications to be private, here's a crazy thought: don't broadcast them to the public! It's sort of like these people that put posts (like a Presidential death threat, say) on MySpace and then seem shocked when people actually read it.

But as an aside, this article really doesn't have anything to do with the bumper sticker on her car--the case was dismissed by court. It's over: she won, the government lost. Done. This is about the lawsuit that she's filed.

[wadyaknow]

It is pretty chilling when the police stop you and ticket you for your political beliefs. I'll be nonest - I'm already scared to put stickers on my vehicles for Democratic candidates knowing what that that would make me a target.

[terribayless-2009]

I am sorry, but I don't understand why when the state prohibits profane language everyone believes this is about politics. I am sure other people get these tickets, but because their's is not political they don't have anyone to sue. Someone is just looking for attention and I guess it is working!

[jetauma]

Grumpas, Amen.