DENVER – The Wheat Ridge Municipal Court violated a recently-enacted Colorado law banning debtor’s prison practices by sentencing a homeless man to jail because he could not pay a fine, according to a filing this morning by the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado.
Wilburn Taylor was cited for panhandling when a Wheat Ridge police officer found him with a blank cardboard and a pen, intending to make a sign requesting charity from passing motorists.   Taylor appeared before Municipal Court Judge Christopher Randall, pleaded guilty and was assessed a $100 fine. He explained to the court that he was destitute, jobless, and could not pay. Despite that, Judge Randall told Taylor that he would have to pay the fine by a specific date or a warrant would issue for his arrest.
Over the following months, Taylor, who remained homeless and destitute, was arrested and brought to court two more times, with the debt increasing each time. Finally, after the debt had nearly tripled to $275, Judge Randall cited Taylor for “contempt of court” for failing to pay and sentenced him to three days in jail.
“Mr. Taylor was wrongly found in contempt of court for failing to pay a fine that he could not pay,” said Mark Silverstein, ACLU Legal Director. “Colorado law is clear: a conviction for contempt is appropriate only if a defendant has the ability to pay and willfully refuses to do so. In this case, Judge Randall found our client guilty of contempt and sentenced him to jail without any inquiry into his ability to pay. Indeed, the record showed that our client was homeless, unemployed, impoverished, and had no means to pay the fine.”
The Supreme Court has long held that it is unconstitutional to jail an individual for failing to pay a debt that he is too poor to pay. Nevertheless, a 2013 ACLU of Colorado investigation revealed that municipal courts around the state were regularly doing just that. During the 2014 legislative session, in response to the ACLU investigation, the Colorado legislature overwhelmingly passed HB 14-1061, a new state law that mandates due process protections to prevent courts from jailing individuals who cannot pay court fines and fees.
According to the ACLU’s motion, which was filed in the Wheat Ridge Municipal Court by ACLU Cooperating Attorney Ty Gee, the court violated several provisions of the Colorado statute as well as the Constitution, and, therefore, Taylor’s conviction for contempt of court should be vacated.
Resources:
Read the ACLU filing, which includes transcripts from Wilburn Taylor’s court appearances: http://static.aclu-co.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/2015-08-25-Mot-to-Vacate-Judgment.pdf
Read Colorado Legislature Approves Ban on Debtors’ Prisons.
Learn more about the 2013 ACLU of Colorado investigation into debtor’s prison practices in Colorado: https://aclu-co.org/court-cases/debtors-prisons/
Visit the ACLU of Colorado’s End Debtor’s Prisons Campaign Page: https://aclu-co.org/campaigns/end-debtors-prisons/

8/24/15
DENVER – This afternoon, the Colorado Springs City Council will discuss a new proposal that would criminalize “sitting, kneeling, reclining or lying down” in various places, including on planters, sidewalks, and curbs, throughout downtown.

ACLU of Colorado Executive Director Nathan Woodliff-Stanley issued the following statement:

“The ACLU of Colorado strongly opposes the proposed ‘sit-lie’ ordinance in Colorado Springs. Sitting innocently on a planter that appears designed for that purpose is not a threat to public safety. It is an absurd government overreach to make it a crime worthy of a $2500 fine and six months in jail to sit, kneel, or lie down in a public place.
“This ordinance is clearly being proposed to give police another tool of selective enforcement to target, harass, and displace people who are homeless or living in poverty. Public spaces are more than just right-of-ways for shoppers and consumers. Courts have long recognized the importance of public streets and sidewalks as forums for free speech and peaceable assembly, and this ordinance would infringe on those fundamental rights.
“Rather than spending taxpayer dollars to criminalize peaceful conduct, Mayor Suthers and the Colorado Springs City Council should focus their attention on addressing the root causes of poverty and homelessness and on fixing well-established problems of racial bias and use of force in the police department.“
Resources:

Read Colorado Communities are Making it a Crime to be Homeless.
Visit the ACLU of Colorado Criminalization of Homelessness campaign page.

DENVER – In a unanimous decision issued this morning, the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled that a Lakewood Bakery unlawfully discriminated against David Mullins and Charlie Craig by refusing to sell them a cake for their wedding reception. The ruling affirms a finding in May 2014 from the Colorado Civil Rights Commission that Masterpiece Cakeshop’s policy of turning away same-sex couples violates Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act.

“Today is a proud day for equality and for upholding the law. In America, no one should be turned away from a shop or restaurant because of who they are or who they love,” said Ria Mar, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBT Project, who argued the case. “When every lesbian or gay person, every woman, every person of color, every person of every faith can walk into a store, a bank, a hospital, and know that they will get the same service as everyone else, we will have won. Until then, we continue to fight for the equal treatment we all deserve. Today we can celebrate this big win.”

In 2012, Colorado residents David Mullins and Charlie Craig, along with Charlie’s mother Deborah Munn, visited Masterpiece Cakeshop to order a wedding cake. Mullins and Craig planned to marry in Massachusetts and then celebrate with family and friends back home. Masterpiece owner Jack Phillips informed the couple that, because of his religious beliefs, it was his standard business practice to refuse to provide cakes to customers for same-sex weddings. Phillips has turned away several other couples for the same reason.

Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act prohibits businesses, such as Masterpiece Cakeshop, from refusing service based on factors including race, sex, national origin, or sexual orientation. The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Colorado filed suit on behalf of Mullins and Craig in 2013. In December 2013, an administrative judge ruled that the bakery had illegally discriminated against the couple. In 2014, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission affirmed that ruling. Masterpiece Cakeshop appealed.

According to the opinion, “Masterpiece remains free to continue espousing its religious beliefs, including its opposition to same-sex marriage. However, if it wishes to operate as a public accommodation and conduct business within the State of Colorado, CADA prohibits it from picking and choosing its customers based on their sexual orientation.”

When businesses and other institutions that serve the public have sought exemptions to laws barring discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, the courts have held that businesses are required to comply with anti-discrimination laws. The courts have ruled without regard to whether LGBT people could have obtained the goods or service elsewhere.  Instead the courts have recognized the harm to equal opportunity if lesbian and gay people can be turned away from businesses otherwise open to the public because of who they are.

more on this case