Hamtramck council bans LGBTQ flags on City Property

[oladub]

Ganging up on someone is disgraceful but back to the topic:

"On Tuesday, the council unanimously approved removing Russ Gordon and Cathy Stackpoole from the Hamtramck Human Rights Commission for flying the rainbow flag over a public sidewalk, with a member saying they 'defied the rule of law.' "

On a technicality, I thought that this law applied only to flags mounted on poles, small P this being Hamtramck, on City property.

[Henry Whalley]

On a technicality, I thought that this law applied only to flags mounted on poles, small P this being Hamtramck...

There are few Poles left in Hamtramck and, except for the priests, most do the horizontal polka with the opposite sex.

[Richard]

Ganging up on someone is disgraceful but back to the topic:

"On Tuesday, the council unanimously approved removing Russ Gordon and Cathy Stackpoole from the Hamtramck Human Rights Commission for flying the rainbow flag over a public sidewalk, with a member saying they 'defied the rule of law.' "

On a technicality, I thought that this law applied only to flags mounted on poles, small P this being Hamtramck, on City property.

I thought a human rights commission was to make sure peoples rights were not violated according to established law and not school the public on how to skirt the established law.

But that is the trend as of late,do not use the system as established in a democratic way to change laws,just get a bunch of people together and make a lot of noise or burn a city to force change through the process of bullying.

Notice the pattern as it even repeats itself on social media.

I do not know - I used to be somewhat biased against Hamtramck because of the Muslim prevalence but they have seemed to intergraded into American society and how things are supposed to be done a heck of a lot better then non immigrants have as a majority it seems at times.

[oladub]

Here is the exact wording that AP used. "HAMTRAMCK, Mich. [[AP) — A Detroit-area community has banned LGBTQ+ flags from publicly owned flagpoles " If Russ Gordon and Cathy Stockpile didn't fly their pride flags on a "publicly owned flagpole", if they were waving their flags around with their hands for instance, they might have been improperly punished.

[Richard]

Two members of a Hamtramck human rights commission raised an LGBTQ+ flag on a city flagpole Sunday, defying a controversial flag rule in the city for more than two hours.
Catrina Stackpoole, a member of the city's Human Relations Commission member and Russ Gordon, chair of the commission, hung the large, $500 Pride flag on a city pole along Jos. Campau Street near Neibel Street just after 3 p.m.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...y/70396074007/

Apparently there was a pole involved,disappointing part,no strippers.

They mentioned several times how much the flag costs,so does a $500 flag deserve more respect then a $20 flag?

Lots of news agencies reported on this and it is always - An all Muslim Counsel verses the rainbow flag,us against them,which defeats the whole diversity and inclusion charade because there are many cities across the country that have implemented the same rules,that are not all Muslim.

Just like the original statements of - This is an attack on gays.

Nobody ever reported it was an all white or all black counsel when the other cities decisions,just it was an all Muslim, in the hopes that they can draw from the publics hatred towards Muslims in order to further their cause of stop the hate,by using hate as a tool of leverage to promote it.

[Zacha341]

Former Hamtramck officials sue city over Pride flag ban

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...t/71477145007/

From CBSNews article:

"We're not in this lawsuit for money. We're in this lawsuit to overturn the unconstitutional resolution that was passed by council and to put the flags back up. We want all the flags back up, including the pride flag," Gordon said.

https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news...onal-concerns/

[JBMcB]

"We're not in this lawsuit for money. We're in this lawsuit to overturn the unconstitutional resolution that was passed by council and to put the flags back up. We want all the flags back up, including the pride flag," Gordon said.

There is some pretty clear caselaw here. A government entity can restrict any form of speech on government property as long as it is viewpoint neutral. That is, they can ban all flags except the American flag, but not pick and choose which other flags are allowed. I'm pretty sure there have been cases covering flags, but there have defiantly been cases covering ads on city buses, kiosks at city hall, and signs in front of government buildings.

The only variable is allowing the MIA flag. That is a requirement baked into federal law covering federal buildings, so it might fly, but it might not.

The other factor, I believe, is that there has to be a compelling government interest in the ban. That could be as simple as they don't want to have to deal with managing which flags fly on what day, it's a fairly low hurdle to clear.

[Henry Whalley]

[QUOTE=JBMcB;638222]There is some pretty clear caselaw here.../QUOTE]

Coleslaw notwithstanding, IMHO Hamtramck should let a freak flag fly...

"Almost Cut My Hair"

I almost cut my hair
It happened just the other day
It was gettin' kinda long
I could-a said, it was in my way
But I didn't and I wonder why
I feel like letting my freak flag fly
And I feel like I owe it to someone

Must be because I had the flu for Christmas
And I'm not feelin' up to par
It increases my paranoia
Like lookin' at my mirror and seein' a police car
But I'm not givin' in an inch to fear
Cause I promised myself this year
I feel like I owe it to someone

When I finally get myself together
I'm gonna get down in that sunny southern weather
And I find a place inside to laugh
Separate the wheat from the chaff
I feel like I owe it to someone

[Richard]

There is some pretty clear caselaw here. A government entity can restrict any form of speech on government property as long as it is viewpoint neutral. That is, they can ban all flags except the American flag, but not pick and choose which other flags are allowed. I'm pretty sure there have been cases covering flags, but there have defiantly been cases covering ads on city buses, kiosks at city hall, and signs in front of government buildings.

The only variable is allowing the MIA flag. That is a requirement baked into federal law covering federal buildings, so it might fly, but it might not.

The other factor, I believe, is that there has to be a compelling government interest in the ban. That could be as simple as they don't want to have to deal with managing which flags fly on what day, it's a fairly low hurdle to clear.

Its taxpayer money that the city will have to spend defending,what lawyer picked this up?

A city 1/2 Muslim and 1/2 progressive,what could possibly go wrong.