March 03, 2013 Stephen Elzinga 2012 JD Candidate, Rogers College of Law Re: Your Law Review Article

on Retaliatory Forum Closure and Other Government Actions Intended to Suppress Free Speech Dear Mr. Elzinga: Several Weeks ago, after speaking with local Director Jane Prescott-Smith, I joined the National Institute for Civil Discourse and began researching the various articles on their website. Of immediate interest was an article on Freedom of Speech by Rogers College of Law Professor Toni Massaro and University of Arizona Professor of Sociology Robin Stryker. A little more research brought me to your law review article on Retaliatory Forum Closure. In 2006 I conducted the first meeting of the Tucson Weekly Public Forum (TWPF) on Library Square, near the corner of Pennington and Stone, held every Wednesday at noon, in order to communicate with public officials on their lunch break. The purpose of the forum was to present an opportunity, on an objective non-partisan basis, for the public to air their views on all sides of what the media had dubbed as the Immigration Debate, a subject on which there has been intense partisan bickering but precious little debate. At the beginning of every meeting I solicited viewpoints from all public speakers, especially if their viewpoint differed from mine. Unfortunately the forum failed, and was discontinued in 2009 due to the lack of any reasonable community controls, or

respect, by a particularly violent element present in this community, and, because a Tucson Municipal Court Judge, in the absence of legal authority, had the audacity to issue a nonappealable Condition of Release Order which forbad me from returning to within 1,000 feet of 33 North Stone, which is directly across the street from the Office of the Pima County Legal Defender, who previously had objected to the forum and the viewpoints expressed therein. (The legal issue of Transparently Invalid Orders of the Court is now up on Appeal to Pima County Superior Court. Interestingly; the underlying cases include Walker v Birmingham, (Martin Luther King), and State v Chavez, featuring noted Labor Organizer Cesar Chavez, who had been arrested for violently protesting the use of Illegal Mexican Labor to break a Farm Workers Union Strike.) First Amendment Retaliation is a well established practice in this Community. In recent years it has been exposed in several Title 42 Section 1983 lawsuits: Gilmartin vs. Smith, Miranda, and Ochoa, filed in 2000, and Warden v Tucson City Officials, filed in 2011. The Gilmartin case (Dr. Kevin Gilmartin is the world renowned author of Continuum of Compromise ) went to trial in 2006, with the jury, after a 17 day trial, returning a verdict in favor of Plaintiffs Gilmartin and Harris, in the amount of 2.9 million dollars for acts of Conspiracy and First Amendment Retaliation, including 2 million dollars in punitive damages, the bulk of which the City of Tucson (unlawfully) paid in 2009, three weeks before promoting Defendant (and principal bad actor) Richard Miranda to the position of Assistant Tucson City Manager. To review Gilmartin, click HERE. The List of Horribles set forth in both Gilmartin and Warden are astonishing, and largely ignored by the local media. Nonetheless the facts set forth in both cases form the basis of a definitive historical record of local government interference with Free Speech Rights, perhaps unmatched anywhere else in America today. One of your observations particularly resonated with me:

Despite a facade of facial neutrality, retaliatory forum closures specifically harm targeted speakers by making them the object of community scorn. I endorse this sentiment and add my own, unfortunate experience: During the three years it operated, the TWPF, and the presentation of differing viewpoints, inspired scorn and ridicule from every element of the local establishment; from the media to the legal, from business to left wing self anointed Humanitarian Non Profit Organizations, to right wing groups which eventually formed the basis of the local Tea Party Movement in 2009, etc. The trial testimony in Gilmartin (I have access to the transcripts), the video records of my many rallies, (including police engagement in numerous retaliatory acts intended to chill public speech), the trial testimony of police officers, evidentiary disclosures, etc., form a remarkable body of documentation which, in the public interest, I would like to share with legal academics, historians, students of government, etc. And I would be particularly happy to share them with you and your colleagues, should you have an on-going interest in these issues, or with other scholars interested in protecting the First Amendment. By way of establishing my bona-fides, click HERE and read a Letter of Recommendation from local Attorney, and Rogers Law School Graduate, Noah van Amburg. Of course, you may re-publish or re-send this letter to anyone you wish. Yours Truly, Roy Warden roywarden@hotmail.com cc: Dr. Kevin Gilmartin, Director Jane Prescott-Smith, Attorney Noah van Amburg To Copy, Re-Publish or Review the Internet Published Article, Click Here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/128280346/FIRST-AMENDMENTRETALIATION-FIRST-LETTER-TO-ROGERS-COLLEGE-OF-LAWSTUDENTS-doc