ACLU of Colorado Executive Director Nathan Woodliff-Stanley presented the following testimony to the Colorado Senate Judiciary Committee in opposition to SB 64, a bill that would have allowed death sentences to be given by non-unanimous juries.  The bill was defeated.
Thank you, Madam Chair.  My name is Nathan Woodliff-Stanley, Executive Director of the ACLU of Colorado, and I testify in opposition to Senate Bill 64.

There are only three states that currently allow non-unanimous juries in death penalty sentencing—Florida, Alabama and Delaware.  Two of these states are considering legislation to require unanimous juries, and one is moving closer to ending the death penalty entirely.  There is no reason for Colorado to be the only state moving in the other direction, possibly unconstitutionally, to allow non-unanimous juries in death penalty cases.  Death is an irreversible punishment that should never be allowed under weaker standards than we require for something like shoplifting.  Juries are already structurally biased toward death sentences because jurors have to be death-qualified, willing to give the death penalty, to even serve on a death penalty jury.  If juries in Colorado have not been imposing the death penalty as often, perhaps that should be seen as a sign that we are moving away from a bad and broken system, not as a reason to make executions easier.

By nearly all accounts, the death penalty is useless as a deterrent, and in fact murder rates are higher in states using the death penalty than in those that do not.  Even with unanimous juries, many innocent people across this nation have been given death sentences only to be exonerated many years later.  The last thing we should be doing is increasing the likelihood of fatal mistakes here in Colorado.

Even apart from bigger-picture issues with the death penalty, there are many problems with non-unanimous juries.  A non-unanimous sentence would be seen as less valid and more open to challenge.  A non-unanimous jury is more likely to give death after a mistaken conviction, and in fact, Florida, with non-unanimous juries, has the highest rate of exonerations after mistaken death sentences in the country.  We should not adopt legislation that will make it more likely to execute someone who is innocent, someone who is mentally ill, or someone who is marginalized or poor or who simply did not have good counsel.  Please vote against Senate Bill 64.

DENVER - The ACLU of Colorado filed suit this morning on behalf of Danny Ledonne, a former professor who was banned by school officials from the Adams State University campus in Alamosa, CO after he created a website criticizing various university administration practices.

From May 2011 to June 2015, Ledonne taught in the Mass Communications program and performed video production work for Adams State University.  In September 2015, after his employment at the university had ended, he launched WatchingAdams.org, a website that “provides ongoing coverage of critical news and information about Adams State University, a public institution of higher education in southern Colorado.”  The website includes public compensation data and interviews with former students, faculty, and staff.

On October 12th, Ledonne posted a series of articles criticizing the pay disparity between faculty and the administration and alleging that the university had violated the Colorado Wage Act by not making timely payments to adjunct professors.  Two days later, University President Beverlee McClure issued a “No Trespass Order” to Ledonne, delivered at his residence by campus police chief Paul Grohowski.  The order declared that for “an indefinite period of time,” Ledonne was prohibited from being on Adams State University property and that his presence on campus “would result in his immediate arrest for trespass.”

“Not only were Danny Ledonne’s First Amendment rights violated when university officials retaliated against him for operating a website criticizing their policies, the ban was issued without notice or an explanation of the evidence being used to support it, which violated his constitutional right to due process,” said ACLU of Colorado Legal Director Mark Silverstein.

The ACLU complaint, filed this morning in Federal District Court, cites a 1973 Colorado Supreme Court decision finding that “a non-student’s right to access Colorado public university functions and facilities which are otherwise open to the public-at-large, is a valuable property or liberty interest entitled to constitutional protection.” According to the Court, access to a public university cannot be denied without first providing adequate notice of charges, reasonable opportunity to prepare to meet the charges, an orderly hearing, and a fair and impartial decision.

“We bring this lawsuit to protect the rights of not just Mr. Ledonne, but all Coloradoans,” said ACLU of Colorado cooperating attorney N. Reid Neureiter of Wheeler, Trigg, O’Donnell LLP. “As the Colorado Supreme Court has recognized, public universities are important public resources.  Members of the public should not be barred from otherwise public college campuses without being given notice of what they have supposedly done, and being given an opportunity to challenge the allegations.”

Ledonne operates a video production business, Emberwilde Productions, and many of his professional obligations require him to attend and film events on the Adams State campus, which is open to the public.  For instance, he has served as the Director of the Southern Colorado Film Festival at Adams State.  He was unable to attend the 2015 Festival because of the campus ban, which was issued just one day before the festival began.

“Adams State is the hub of artistic and cultural engagement in Alamosa.  If I cannot go on to campus for fear of being arrested, my personal reputation and ability to earn a living in this community are severely hindered,” said Ledonne.  “The climate of fear this creates for others who might also wish to speak up is a broad chilling effect that cannot go unchallenged.”

The ACLU has asked the Court to immediately stop Adams State University from enforcing the campus ban, as well as to rule that Ledonne’s constitutional right to free speech and due process were violated.

more on this case

1/26/16
DENVER – This afternoon, the Colorado Springs City Council will once again consider a controversial proposal to make it a crime, punishable by up to a $500 fine on first offense and up to 90 days in jail on second offense, to sit, kneel, recline, or lie down on curbs and sidewalks downtown.
Prepared Remarks of ACLU of Colorado Field Coordinator Alejandra Garza to the Colorado Springs City Council on the proposed “Sit/Lie” Ordinance:

The ACLU of Colorado strongly opposes the ordinance before the Council today, as we oppose any new laws that make it a crime to use public spaces, especially those that disproportionately target people who are homeless or living in poverty.
As we have said repeatedly to this Council for months, there is no public safety justification for making it a crime to sit.
If this Council moves forward with this proposal, it will become a criminal act for my 7-year-old daughter to sit or kneel down to tie her shoes. That is the very definition of absurd.
Of course, we all know that this new law will not be enforced against me or my daughter. It is intended entirely to give the police another tool of selective enforcement to target and harass people who are homeless or living in poverty and have nowhere else to go.
Far too often, this city’s approach to poverty and homelessness has been criminalization. Several months ago, an ACLU of Colorado investigation revealed hundreds of cases where Colorado Springs, at all levels of its justice system, enforced unconstitutional panhandling ordinances against poor and homeless persons who were not actually violating those ordinances, persons who were merely displaying a sign asking for charity.
An additional ACLU investigation found that hundreds of fines that were handed out to poor and homeless individuals for non-jailable offenses were then converted to jail sentences, setting up a kind of debtor’s prison in Colorado Springs.
Given the recent history, it is extremely hard to believe that this ordinance will be enforced correctly and that poor and homeless people will not be wrongly jailed, at the taxpayers’ expense, if this new law were to pass.
We welcome the City’s decision to repeal the unconstitutional provisions of the panhandling ordinances later in today’s meeting.  Unfortunately, at the same time this Council is removing one unconstitutional way that poor people have been unjustifiably targeted, it is considering putting in place a wrong-headed proposal to make it a crime to sit on the public sidewalk.   The Council, the police, and the courts should focus their time and resources on actual crimes with actual victims, not rounding up and harassing people who are doing nothing more than sitting.
SEE ALSO:

ACLU Wins Dismissal of Hundreds of Panhandling Charges in Colorado Springs: https://aclu-co.org/aclu-wins-dismissal-of-hundreds-of-panhandling-charges-in-colorado-springs/

Colorado Springs Sentences Hundreds of Impoverished People to Debtors’ Prison in Violation of U.S Constitution and State Law: https://aclu-co.org/colorado-springs-sentences-hundreds-of-impoverished-people-to-debtors-prison-in-violation-of-u-s-constitution-and-state-law/

ACLU of Colorado Statement on the Proposed “Sit-Lie” Ordinance in Colorado Springs (8/24/15): https://aclu-co.org/aclu-of-colorado-statement-on-the-proposed-sit-lie-ordinance-in-colorado-springs/