The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday affirmed a lower court's ruling that the 2012 arrest of two anti-abortion protestors was constitutional.
Sidney Allen, a Little Rock Police Department lieutenant, arrested Ronald Duhe and Mark Holick on disorderly conduct charges while they were protesting Little Rock Family Planning Services' abortion options Sept. 14, 2012.
Duhe and Holick with Spirit One Christian Ministries, Inc., which Holick founded in 1991, then filed suit against Allen and the city of Little Rock, claiming that the arrests violated their First and Fourth Amendment rights.
U.S. District Judge Kristine Baker heard the case and ruled against Holick and Duhe. They then contested the decision with the appellate court. A three-judge panel -- made up of Lavenski Smith, chief judge, who is from Little Rock; James Loken of Minneapolis; and Roger Wollman of Sioux Falls, S.D. -- supported Baker's verdict.
"We were glad that the Eighth Circuit and the court affirmed our view," Little Rock City Attorney Tom Carpenter said.
Duhe and Holick, represented by Colorado-based attorney Rebecca Messall, will have two weeks to petition for a rehearing or to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, said Bill Mann, the Little Rock chief deputy city attorney who defended the case.
The group is in the process of reviewing the court's ruling, Messall said via text message.
She did not comment further.
Messall argued that Little Rock officials violated the mens' First Amendment rights by intimidating them and making them less likely to protest in the city again. She also argued that Allen violated the men's Fourth Amendment rights by neglecting to gather enough information to arrest Holick and Duhe on the grounds of disorderly conduct.
The group called Little Rock's disorderly conduct statute vague and overbroad.
Allen testified that he received complaints that the protest noise was disturbing the operation of the clinic and another business.
Once he arrived, he further noted that Holick was blocking vehicles from entering the clinic's driveway, which the court determined was within grounds to arrest them for disorderly conduct, according to the opinion.
The protestors' actions allowed them to be arrested by the parameters of the disorderly conduct clause, Mann said.
The appellate court also found the city's disorderly conduct statute to be constitutional, as it specifically outlines that people are in violation of the clause when they make unreasonable or excessive noise or obstruct vehicular or pedestrian traffic, according to the opinion.
Duhe and Holick also sued Allen and the city, saying Little Rock's system for obtaining a permit for a protest and the amount of time the men spent detained were unconstitutional, according to the opinion.
The court ruled that Holick and Duhe were not able to challenge the permit system because they did not have a permit for their own protest.
The judges also decided that Arkansas' laws for inmate detainment align with federal standards, meaning that the about 12 hours that the men spent in jail did not interfere with their Fourth Amendment rights.
"We're all very hopeful that this puts an end to it," Mann said.
Metro on 09/06/2018