'Crude But Not Criminal': Court Says Flipping Off the Cops is Protected Speech
A Michigan woman's constitutional rights were violated when a police officer gave her a speeding ticket after she flipped him the bird, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled.
March 20, 2019 at 02:47 PM
2 minute read
A Michigan woman's constitutional rights were violated when a police officer gave her a speeding ticket after she flipped him the bird, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled.
In June 2017, Debra Cruise-Guylas was pulled over for a minor speeding violation in an area that was a well-known “speed trap” about 18 miles southwest of Detroit. Officer Matthew Minard wrote her a ticket for a lesser violation, but Cruise-Guylas was far from relieved. ”I know this is a bunch of B.S.,” she told the Washington Post. ”When I pulled off, I gave him the middle finger.”
She hadn't gotten far before Minard pulled her over again and changed her ticket to a more serious violation.
Cruise-Guylas sued Minard, claiming her constitutional rights under the First and Fourth Amendments were violated by the new ticket. In turn, Minard asked for the case to be dismissed, arguing he had “qualified immunity” as a police officer and could not be sued for anything done in a professional capacity. A lower court denied his motion to dismiss, and the case ended up in front of the Sixth Circuit.
In a 3-0 decision, a panel of judges agreed with Cruise-Guylas.
Citing cases of citizens giving the finger to police officers that proved the gesture was “crude but not criminal,” Judge Jeffrey Sutton wrote on behalf of his colleagues, “This ancient gesture of insult is not the basis for a reasonable suspicion of a traffic violation or impending criminal activity.”
The panel concluded that Minard pulling Cruise-Guylas over a second time was a violation of both her Fourth Amendment right to be free of unreasonable government search and seizure and was based on her exercise of her free speech rights. ”Any reasonable officer would know that a citizen who raises her middle finger engages in speech protected by the First Amendment,” Sutton wrote.
The case is heading back to U.S. district court, where Cruise-Guylas is seeking unspecified damages.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAm Law 100 Partners on Trump’s Short List to Replace Gensler as SEC Chair
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250