Federal Judge Affirms City's Right to Bar Confederate Battle Flag From Parade
A Trump appointee ruled the city of Alpharetta was within its rights to stop the Sons of Confederate Veterans from carrying the Confederate battle flag in its annual Old Soldiers Day Parade.
June 26, 2020 at 06:55 PM
3 minute read
Alpharetta city officials were within their rights to tell the Sons of Confederate Veterans they couldn't display the Confederate battle flag in the city's 2019 Old Soldiers Day Parade, a federal judge in Atlanta ruled Friday.
U.S. District Judge William "Billy" Ray of the Northern District of Georgia held that the parade—which was inaugurated after the Civil War and originally intended to recognize Confederate soldiers—was a form of government speech and, as such, the city was within its right to bar the SCV from carrying or displaying the Confederate battle flag.
"In addition to the expansion of the parade's honorees, society has evolved since the parade's formation and no longer holds the same degree of affinity for Confederate emblems and flags that previously existed," Ray said, especially because the battle flag has become a vehicle for "viewpoints and conduct that is otherwise considered offensive today."
"The city did not want to embrace any negative messages that the Confederate flag conveys to those who find the use of the flag to be offensive," he said. "The city was also concerned about the prospect of violence that could result if the SCV carried the Confederate flag in the parade, particularly in light of recent incidents in other parts of the country."
Michael Stacy of Atlanta's Bovis, Kyle, Burch & Medlin was lead counsel for the city of Alpharetta. Timothy Kyle King of Hodges McEachern, & King in Jonesboro represented plaintiffs Richard Leake, a member of the SCV's Roswell chapter, and Alpharetta resident Michael Dean, who also wanted to fly a Confederate flag in the parade.
The order from Ray—a former jurist on the Georgia Court of Appeals who was appointed to the federal bench by President Donald Trump in 2018—was the third this month by a Georgia court curtailing efforts to mythologize the defeated Confederacy and its symbols. On Juneteenth, DeKalb County removed a 30-foot-tall Confederate monument adjacent to the county courthouse to comply with a court order issued by Superior Court Judge Clarence Seeliger declaring it a public nuisance. On Monday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit stripped so-called Southern heritage groups and Confederate descendants of standing in their efforts to stop the relocation of a 75-foot-tall Confederate monument in Lakeland, Florida.
Last year, Ray declined to issue an emergency temporary restraining order sought by the SCV that would have overruled the city's battle flag ban. The Alpharetta parade took place Aug. 3 without the SCV's' participation. Last December, the city council and mayor adopted a resolution saying the city would no longer sponsor or financially support the parade, according to Ray's order.
"The city has historically utilized the parade to convey their public message of appreciation to American war veterans," Ray concluded. "The city's presence in the application process, advertising, and in the parade itself leads an observer to identify the speaker as the city. The city's financial and administrative control over the parade establishes that the city had direct control over the message disseminated to the public. The voice of the parade was that of the government, and the city was within its right to restrict the SCV's use of the Confederate flag so as to portray what the city thought to be appropriate for their message."
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 AllGeorgia Supreme Court Honoring Troutman Pepper Partner, Former Chief Justice
2 minute read'A 58-Year-Old Engine That Needs an Overhaul': Judge Wants Traffic Law Amended
3 minute readAppeals Court Removes Fulton DA From Georgia Election Case Against Trump, Others
6 minute readFamily of 'Cop City' Activist Killed by Ga. Troopers Files Federal Lawsuit
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
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