Blackface Incident -- Police and Firemen
 

Jun 25, 2003 7:16 am US/Eastern
(1010 WINS) NEW YORK A federal judge has ruled that the First
Amendment rights of two firefighters and a police officer were
violated when the city fired them for riding in blackface on a parade
float in 1998.

The government ''may not prohibit the _expression of an idea simply
because a segment of society finds it offensive,'' U.S. District
Judge John E. Sprizzo said in his ruling Tuesday.

Sprizzo rejected statements by former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani that the
firings stemmed from concerns over civil unrest, saying he concluded
that the ''true motivation'' was Giuliani's belief that the float was
a ''disgusting display of racism.''

Kate O'Brien Ahlers, a spokeswoman for the city law office,
said, ''We will definitely be appealing this.''

Those on the Labor Day float threw watermelon and fried chicken to
paradegoers and made it appear as if one of the men in blackface was
being dragged not long after the highly publicized case of James Byrd
Jr., a black man in Texas who was dragged to his death from a pickup
truck, city officials said.

Sprizzo ruled after hearing evidence earlier this year, including
testimony from Giuliani, who said he urged the firing of the three
city employees because he feared the controversy might lead to race
riots.

At the time, Giuliani publicly declared, ''They will be fired.''

The white employees firefighters Jonathan Walters and Robert Steiner
and police officer Joseph Locurto sued the city to get their jobs
back.

They testified that they had no racist intent and that their actions
were protected by the First Amendment because the float was a parody.

The firefighters said they meant to poke fun at their predominantly
white community's racist views with the ''Black to the Future 2098''
float. They said they used stereotypes, such as the blackface and
Afro wigs, because that's the way community residents perceived
blacks.

In earlier years, floats in the parade similarly mocked Hasidic Jews,
gays and Asians.

Chris Dunn, a staff attorney with the New York Civil Liberties Union,
said the ruling ''sends a message that city employees can't be
scapegoated to serve a mayor's political agenda and that's exactly
what happened here.''

Giuliani was listed as a defendant in the case in his role as mayor.
A call requesting comment was not immediately returned by his
spokeswoman.

Michael N. Block, a lawyer for Walters, said he and his client
were ''very pleased.''

Robert Didio, a lawyer for Steiner, said he was ''absolutely
thrilled.''

''It shows that the little guy can fight back,'' he said. ''This was
unfortunately a situation where Mr. Steiner did something foolish and
he recognizes that. But the penalty imposed by the mayor and the fire
commissioner was not consistent with the actions on the float.''

Re: Blackface Incident -- Police and Firemen
 

:rolleyes:

Re: Blackface Incident -- Police and Firemen
 

Oh give me a got damn break with the stupidity and the bullsh*t!!

Re: Blackface Incident -- Police and Firemen
 

First Amendment issue?
 

As an employee of the Minnesota Civil Liberties Union, I find the comments of the NY CLU attorney to be assanine and almost as stupid as the act itself. Is this really a First Amendment issue or is this 3 people whose salaries are paid by taxpayers and who displayed behavior not appropriate for city/public employees? The then CEO of the city found it to be the latter and fired them. I agree and hope it is appealed.

Just poking fun??????
 

I fail to see the "poking fun" aspect of this act!!!!!! It seems to me that these public servants are adding fuel to the fire. What's going to be next....a float dedicated at "poking fun" at slavery????

It's sad that things of this nature occur so often. People still fail to realize that though we are all guaranteed "Freedom of Expression" we should also practice some degree of common sense. You are entitled to your views, no matter how ignorant they are. But not when you infringe upon the rights of others, then you have seriously crossed the line.

You have it right there. Just because you have rights doesn't mean there should be no consequences for acting an azz and harassing or harming others.

Agreed. ESPECIALLY when you are representing some PUBLIC organization or what have you. As much as I disagree with what they did, they had every right to do it...say if they were at home on their own property. But as a representative of the CITY...they were dead-arse wrong and deserved to be fired. We all have an image to uphold for we are ALWAYS representing SOMEONE...if you are at home and the only people you are embarassing are yourself and your own family...knock yourself out. On the other hand, if you are out embarrassing a government entity where taxpayers money pays YOUR salary...you had better believe you are going to be censored. Shiet...even George W. can't even get up there and do & say stuff like that...and he's the damn president!

I am a big proponet of freedom speech, however if these individuals were representing the New York City Fire and Police Departments, they deserve to be fired. Such "negligence" (since they claimed it wasn't meant to be offensive....riiiiight) is unacceptable and undermines the authority of each organization. As a born and raised New Yorker (HarlemWorld!!!) I find it disgusting (and I think unconstituional also) that public funds (namely mine and my family's) would go towards vile behavior.

I agree that the display was insensitive and that the officers should be reprimanded. However, if it is indeed true that this type of parody was performed on other occasions poking fun at other groups, the City's case is weakened. If they are going to reprimand for this type of behavior, they must be consistent.

Apparently, these guys also clowned Asians and gays, according to news accounts I read. I think what they did was tacky, but I also think Giuliani was trying to overcompensate for his own racial missteps in the past.

Funny how it is just a "parody" but I noticed they never parodied white people. Only minorities.

Mccoyred, if I was the attorney I would argue that while it has gone on the past, this is the time to put the proverbial foot down and bring it to a halt. Many things went on in the past that were overlooked and sometimes even condoned that we are appalled at today. It has to stop somewhere.

I agree. Just because you get away with stealing 99 out of 100 times doesn't mean that you get to keep on doing it.

In response to both McCoyred and Steeltrap, do we know if their were different reactions this time? I haven't read the previous news accounts but this latest one implies that Guiliana felt there was a threat of a race riot. Do either of you know whether there were protests before by Asians or Gays?