Jackson Recall Organizers Object to Latest Court Ruling

GoLocalProv News Team

Jackson Recall Organizers Object to Latest Court Ruling

The organizers of the effort to recall Providence City Councilman Kevin Jackson — who were sued by Jackson’s attorneys — have fired back at the latest court ruling which terminated the 120 period for collection of signatures.

“On Friday morning, a sitting elected official accomplished an extraordinary judicial victory that undermined and subverted the Democratic process,” wrote attorney Dawn Euer for defendants Patricia Kammerer and Karina Wood, adding that Jackson “took the extraordinary and outrageous step of suing his own constituents personally.”

The ACLU has also weighed in, alleging that Jackson's actions amount to a SLAPP suit -- a strategic lawsuit against public participation. (SEE BELOW)

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

Latest in Legal Battle

On Friday, the Board of Canvassers sent a letter to Jackson Attorney Artin Coloian stipulating that Jackson’s team has until Friday, October 28 to issue objections pertaining to the recall effort taking place in Ward 3 in Providence. 

Read: Providence Board of Canvassers Flip-Flop on Jackson Recall

On Monday, Euer filed a motion on behalf of Kammerer and Wood in Superior Court to modify that agreement to “restore their rights.”

Euer asserts that the plaintiff “has not demonstrated irreparable harm, that the balance of harms will harm Citizen Defendants, and that depriving citizen defendants of the right to collect signatures will disturb status quo.”

Euer concludes by petitioning the court to "modify the Board of Canvassers’ prior decision to permit Citizen Defendants to collect petition signatures pending the final review of any challenges to the initial declaration.” 

ACLU on Jackson Recall

ACLU of Rhode Island Executive Director Steven Brown issued the following statement in response to the lawsuit filed by Jackson against Kammerer and Wood. 

“The ACLU is not familiar enough with the mechanics of the City’s recall mechanism to comment on the specifics of the allegations contained in Councilor Jackson’s complaint. We do agree that certain due process standards are essential before subjecting elected officials to the burdens imposed in having to defend themselves against removal from an elected position they obtained through a democratic process. 

“At the same time, we are deeply troubled that, in addition to suing City officials and the Board of Canvassers, which is responsible for overseeing the recall petition process, the lawsuit names as defendants the two private individuals who have been involved in mounting this recall campaign. Their involvement in the suit is completely unnecessary in order for a court to address any legitimate due process concerns raised by the petition process.  Thus, the inclusion of these two individuals as defendants strikes us a classic SLAPP suit – an attempt to silence private citizens for seeking to exercise their First Amendment right to petition government.
 
“As Rhode Island’s SLAPP suit statute notes, ‘full participation by persons and organizations and robust discussion of issues of public concern before the legislative, judicial, and administrative bodies and in other public fora are essential to the democratic process.’ These two Providence residents should not be forced to defend themselves in a court of law for exercising petition rights granted them by the City Charter. The ACLU urges Councilor Jackson to amend his complaint and remove these two private citizens as defendants.”


Rhode Island's Best Communities 2016

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.