Agreement Resolves ACLU's Challenge
to Colorado Begging Law
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 20, 1996
The parties in a federal court class action challenging Colorado’s anti-begging statute filed a formal signed agreement today to resolve the lawsuit, which was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) last July. The challenged statute makes it a crime to "loiter[] for the purpose of begging." The agreement asks district court judge William F. Downs to declare that the statute is unconstitutional and to issue a permanent injunction forbidding its enforcement.
The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of four homeless residents of Denver who sit or stand by the roadside and use signs to ask for assistance from the public. Two of the plaintiffs had received citations for violating the Colorado statute. The other two had received warnings from Denver police.
Two additional plaintiffs, Sydney Storman and Peter St. Marie, are not homeless. They contended that enforcement of the Colorado statute interfered with their right to receive information and ideas. They asserted that the signs carried by homeless individuals have prompted discussion and focused their attention on larger social issues of poverty and homelessness.
"We are tremendously pleased to resolve this lawsuit with this agreement," said Jerry Gordon, an ACLU cooperating attorney working on the case. "With this agreement, our clients will get everything that we asked for, and the City and the ACLU will not have to spent time and money preparing for a trial."
"This is a victory for our clients’ First Amendment rights," said Mark Silverstein, ACLU Legal Director. "Our clients will no longer face the risk of a criminal charge for exercising their First Amendment right to sit peacefully along the public right of way with signs informing the public that they are hungry, that they are homeless, and that they would appreciate assistance from the public."
In recent years a number of courts have recognized that begging is expression that is protected by the First Amendment. A New York law that is almost a carbon copy of Colorado’s law was unconstitutional by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in 1993. Loper v. New York City Police Department, 999 F.2d 699 (2d Cir. 1993).
Some communities have attempted to take these decisions into account by targeting only what has been called "aggressive panhandling." The Colorado statute, however, does not make any distinctions.
"Our clients sit quietly and peacefully with their signs along the roadside," said Gordon.
"They don't obstruct the public right-of-way; they don't initiate conversation; and they don't bother anyone. If the law banned only aggressive panhandling, there is no way that it would apply to our clients."
The statute has not been enforced in Denver since August, when Judge Downs signed an agreement that resolved the ACLU’s request for a preliminary injunction.
Although the ACLU lawsuit applies only in Denver, law enforcement officials in other cities are watching. In October, Colorado Springs Chief of Police Loren Kramer ordered his officers to refrain from further enforcement of the challenged anti-begging statute until the ACLU lawsuit was resolved. Kramer’s action came after criticism prompted by the arrest of street musician Earl Janack, who was playing music for tips when he was arrested and charged under the statute. (See Denver Post 10/17/96.) The charge against Janack has since been dropped. The anti-begging law is section 18-9-112(2)(a) of the Colorado Revised Statutes.