Court: Dearborn violated free speech rights of Christians it arrested

An update from last year's post on this issue: 4 arrested for being Christians on public street in Dearborn arraigned on charges of "disturbing the peace". In Dearborn - aka Dearbornistan - it is considered 'disturbing the peace' to be standing on a public street proclaiming that you are a Christian. Here's the description from Dearborn authorities via The Detroit News last year:

...the four "chose to escalate their behavior, which appeared well-orchestrated and deliberate"

Of what behavior do they speak? Here's the video for some background:

Watch the above video again. They were outside the festival. And their camera equipment was confiscated when they were arrested. Yesterday, a federal appeals court smacked Dearborn something fierce for the gastopo tactics: Dearborn violated free speech rights, Appeals Court rules

A federal appeals court today invalidated a leafleting ban in Dearborn, ruling the city violated a man's free-speech rights when he was blocked from trying to convert Muslims to Christianity.

The 2-1 decision by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sends the case back to federal court in Detroit, where the city and Police Chief Ronald Haddad could be held liable for damages.

George Saieg, a Christian Arab American from California, sued Dearborn for being prevented in 2009 from handing out literature at the annual Arab International Festival on Warren Avenue. The festival will be held again next month.

The appeals court today said the city's ban is not reasonable and that the city and Haddad violated Saieg's First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

"Absent an injunction, Saieg will continue to suffer irreparable injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law," the court concluded.

Hopefully, the City will pay and furthermore will stop persecuting Christians. More from Answering Muslims: Free Speech Victory in Dearborn, Michigan!

Maybe I shouldn't say "in" Dearborn, since the city only sought to suppress free speech in this case. An outside court (the United States Court of Appeals) had to impose Constitutional law on the city.

Dearborn hosts an annual Arab Festival on Warren Avenue. During the festival, the street is reserved, but the adjacent sidewalks are not reserved and therefore remain public property. Hence, prior to 2009, many people would distribute pamphlets, DVDs, CDs, etc., on the public sidewalks. However, when Ronald Haddad took over as Chief of Police, he announced that no one would be allowed to distribute materials on the public sidewalks. Indeed, he insisted that no one would be allowed to distribute materials within five blocks of the festival. (He justified his decision by claiming that he needed to keep the area clear for pedestrian traffic.)

From a Constitutional perspective, this was quite disturbing, as the government was officially limiting free speech on public sidewalks. Moreover, those of us who attended the festival noticed that security only enforced the policy on Christians. Muslims remained free to distribute their materials.

...Lower courts had ruled in favor of Dearborn (i.e. that Dearborn police could stop people from exercising their freedom of speech on the public sidewalks adjacent to the festival). The appeals court reversed the decision on Constitutional grounds.

In 2009 these same people were attacked at the Muslim festival: