Recently in Civil Rights Law Category

Dolours Price was, to put it mildly, a controversial figure. According to the New York Times, in her time as a member of the Irish Republican Army, she participated in the 1973 London car-bombings, helped carry out kidnappings and executions of suspected informants, and spoke out against the peace accord reached in the 1990s. It was one of her final acts, however, that brought controversy to the legal system of the United States.

Between 2001 and 2006, Price and a fellow IRA member gave a series of interviews to oral historians at Boston College, with one small condition: the tapes could not be released in their lifetimes. Nonetheless, the British subpoenaed the tapes, citing a treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom that requires the countries to share information that would aid criminal inquiries.

Yeah. Stand there. That's right. Put your hands above your head. Yeah. That's good. Okay, you can go. Next. Yeah.

Okay, maybe it's not that creepy, and perhaps the strange men at the airport don't want to see me naked, but that's what it feels like to those of us who have passed through the "naked" scanners that are now occupying the nation's airports. Of course, if you say "no thanks" they say, "come here, big boy" and give you the old grope.

Did we mention that the scanners may (may, evidence still shakey) cause cancer and aren't especially effective at detecting booty bombs or strategically-placed metallic objects?

As our dear First Circuit court has remained relatively silent for the past week, we thought it might be a good opportunity to discuss an ongoing debate in First Circuit states: the proper limits on drone usage.

As the usage of drones increases, and the acquisition costs decrease (a Maine agency just acquired a $300 drone out of “curiosity”) the potential for a pummeling of privacy rights looms. With telephoto lenses, night-vision, and other photography enhancements, the day where a law enforcement agency can cheaply and easily track and photograph your every move is nearly at hand, and it has many Americans concerned.

The ACLU has a great roundup of pending legislation in over thirty states to limit or prohibit the use of drones. There are a few notable local developments in New Hampshire and Maine that are worth taking a closer look at.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a third challenge to the Massachusetts abortion clinic buffer zone law this week, calling the plaintiffs' First Amendment claims a "salmagundi of arguments, old and new."

The statute at the center of the dispute is Mass. Gen. Law ch. 266, § 120E 1/2, which states that "no person shall knowingly enter or remain on a public way or sidewalk adjacent to a reproductive health care facility" (RHCF) within a designated and clearly marked buffer zone.

Former Maine Governor John Baldacci commissioned a mural for the waiting area of the Maine Department of Labor in 2007. The mural — meant to convey the value of the labor force and the history of Maine labor — including depictions of a shoe-worker strike, child laborers and Rosie the Riveter.

In 2011, current Maine Governor Paul LePage created a kerfuffle when he ordered the 11-panel, 7-foot-tall mural removed because he considered it biased in favor of organized labor over business interests. The governor’s mural shuffling led to a lawsuit.

The issue: Whether Gov. LePage violated the First Amendment by removing the Maine labor mural from the waiting room. (Yes, these are the great legal questions of our time.)

In 2008, then-Maine Governor John Baldacci commissioned a mural for the waiting area of the Department of Labor in Augusta, using $60,000 in state funds. The mural was meant to convey the value of the labor force and the history of Maine’s labor, including depiction of a shoe-worker strike, child laborers and Rosie the Riveter. In 2011, current Maine Governor Paul LePage created an uproar when he ordered the 11-panel, 7-foot-tall mural removed because he considered it biased in favor of organized labor over business interests.

That uproar eventually led to a federal lawsuit. This year, a district court ruled that the mural was government speech and Gov. LePage was allowed to remove it. A group consisting of two union officials and three artists are appealing the decision. Monday, the First Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in the matter.

The Supreme Court has yet to announce whether it will consider Gill v. OPM — or any of the seven gay marriage petitions pending before the Court, but today it announced that it will not review the First Circuit’s National Organization for Marriage v. McKee ruling.

In January, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Maine law that requires groups that spend more than $5,000 on referendum advocacy to disclose the identity of donors that gave more than $100. The appellate court found that the law provided fair warning of its reach, it was not overbroad, and its $100 threshold was narrowly tailored to meet Maine’s compelling interest in an informed electorate.

Boston College researchers are still fighting to withhold oral history interviews from foreign authorities.

Back in January, the First Circuit Court of Appeals blocked an order from a lower court judge requiring Boston College to turn over documents pertaining to a former member of the Provisional Irish Republican Army to the United Kingdom. In July, the court ruled that Boston College to hand the recordings over to British authorities, The Chronicle of Higher Education reports.

The Defense of Marriage Act challenge is making its way to the United States Supreme Court. We already talked about the petition filed by BLAG, or the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group. BLAG’s petition called for the Supreme Court to invalidate the First Circuit’s ruling that struck down part of the Defense of Marriage Act as unconstitutional this spring.

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley has now filed a 37-page brief, reports Reuters. The brief was in response to BLAG’s petition.

In April, we brought you the news that the plaintiffs in the lawsuit involving a mural in Maine filed a notice of appeal with the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Now, the case has officially been appealed.

Here's the backstory: In March 2011, Maine's Governor Paul LePage had the controversial mural removed from the waiting area of the Department of Labor in Augusta, Maine. The mural depicted the history of Maine's labor, including visual depictions of a strike.