Posted on 02/15/2005 3:17:18 PM PST by swilhelm73
FLINT, Mich. (AP) -- Mayor Don Williamson is taking a novel tack in fighting lawsuits - he's withholding city business from anyone who has sued Flint within the past five years.
Williamson said the Jan. 21 policy is in the taxpayers' best interests. In recent years, the city faced a multimillion-dollar deficit that prompted the state to declare a financial emergency.
"Who in the world would want to do business if you're sued by 'em?" Williamson said.
But Greg Gibbs, chairman of the Greater Flint branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, said he would go to federal court to have the policy declared unconstitutional.
"That's just a reckless, retaliatory action (against) people who exercise their rights to go to court," Gibbs said. "It's reactionary. It's extreme."
The city attorney's office would not immediately release a list of people or businesses the policy would affect.
Employees who violate the policy face discipline, including a 30-day suspension or firing.
City attorney Trachelle Young said the policy is constitutional because it doesn't limit a person's First Amendment right to petition the government.
But Robert Sedler, a Wayne State University law professor, predicted the policy would not survive a constitutional challenge.
Williamson has issued unusual directives before. Last year, an executive order barred city workers from having non-work-related reading material on city property during their work hours.
He later relaxed the ban to allow newspapers during employee breaks after police temporarily detained a newspaper carrier trying to deliver subscriptions to City Hall.
A recall petition claiming Williamson was trying to "take away our freedom of speech" stalled last year when the county election commission ruled the petition language was too vague.
---
Isn't this common sense?
since the ACLU is against it yes.
I grew up in that town, it is the armpit of America.
"Greg Gibbs"
Sure would like to meet him/her/it in an alley...
For anyone but a government it would be common sense. For the government it sets off Constitutional violations up and down the board.
I fail to see how this will decrease lawsuits. This is more like a full employment policy for trial lawyers. Now every business that has sued that city in the last five years will have grounds to file another lawsuit.
What is your remedy should the city have actually wronged anyone? "So what are you going to do about it, big boy? Sue us and lose five years of future business?" Some of the suits might well have been legit. The city should have some disincentive to wrong others.
I don't know. What were the original lawsuits about?
"That's just a reckless, retaliatory action (against) people who exercise their rights to go to court," Gibbs said.
As much as it leaves a REALLY bad taste in my mouth, I have to agree with the ...ugh...ACLU on this one until I know more.
FMCDH(BITS)
I have to back the mayor on this one. Why should I do business with jerks that sue?
so if a teacher sues the city school district, the will loose their job?
Do worker's comp claims count?
What about contractor that sue cities for payment for work done and prevail?
If I was a lawyer suing the city on behalf of a client I would include a demand for injuncitve relief.
This makes only limited sense.
Yes, I'm crazy.
The government is always honorable, and only jerks sue?
I'd assume the remedy is that the plaintff would win in court and get the appropriate relief. But next month, and next year business is business, and neither side should have anything to do with each other. In other words take your business elsewhere.
So the business shouldn't have to pay any taxes, or buy or renew government licenses? Cool!
I think Camden, New Jersey can give Flint a run for its money, although both are broke.
The Constitution's main purpose is to limit the reach and strength of the government's power over the people.
For one person in the government to decide to use a methodical plan of retribution on lawfully acting people does not necessarily represent the will of the people.
The problem in Flint mostly has to do with GM pulling up stakes and moving out.
Camden still has Campbell's Soup, although their workers speed in and out of town as quickly as possible. All that lives in Camden are welfare cases and druggies. There are no neighborhoods left in the traditional sense.
I'm not sure what is left in Flint for a manufacturing base, I know there is a lot of boarded up buildings.
Heh... businesses also do that. Sued us? Out you go. It is common sense. I knew someone who'd sued the city (I think it was over workers comp; OTOH, that family is such a bunch of cons and liars, it could have been that he was wanted by the law) and claimed in any case that one of the terms of the settlement was that he not set foot inside city limits.
I would never do business with anyone who had sued me in the past....why should a city?
This is crap coming out of the ACLU. How does working with groups that have fielded bunko and frivolous lawsuits against the city helping the citizen taxpayer?
He should also publish the names of the plaintiff's attorneys.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.