HARTFORD, CT — The ACLU Foundation of Connecticut has filed a lawsuit in federal court to stop the state Department of Transportation and State Police from preventing protest signs on highway overpasses, claiming it’s a violation of free speech.
The lawsuit, filed in Hartford Tuesday on behalf of Erin Quinn and Robert Marra, names DOT Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto and Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection Commissioner Ronnell Higgins as defendants.
The lawsuit claims that state police have repeatedly ordered protesters to leave, claiming they are trespassing. Police have issued tickets and made arrests based on claims that signs “distract” drivers on highway overpasses in the Greater New Haven area, the ACLU said.
The lawsuit asks the court to immediately halt “the state’s ongoing suppression of speech,” claiming it is violating the plaintiff’s constitutional rights.
“Public sidewalks are the most protected places we have for free speech,” said Dan Barrett, legal director of the ACLU Foundation of Connecticut, in a news release. “For about eighty years, the law has been clear that speakers cannot be punished for the reactions of listeners.”
Barrett said Connecticut drivers are responsible for their safe driving.
“And if you’ve driven our interstates, you know how ridiculous it is for the state to permit massive electronic billboards along the highway while claiming that overpass pedestrians cannot display small, homemade signs,” he said.
Quinn and Marra are members of a group that gets together to peacefully hold posterboard signs and vinyl banners on highway overpasses above Interstate 95. They stand on streets and sidewalks with no posted restrictions, Barrett said.
“I joined these protests because I believe every citizen has a right to speak up when they feel our government is headed in the wrong direction,” Marra said in the news release. “No one should fear arrest for exercising their First Amendment rights.”
But both have temporarily halted their protests for fear of being arrested or issued citations, according to the lawsuit.
A spokeswoman said CTDOT does not require permits for individuals to congregate on pedestrian areas adjacent to the roadway, but it does require a permit for certain activities in the state right-of-way, such as utility installations, driveway modifications and private development.
“Additionally, state regulations prohibit unauthorized signs in the Right-of-Way, such as signage that is installed in the ground or affixed to a structure, such as the fence on a highway overpass,” DOT spokesperson Eva Zymaris said Wednesday. “These regulations do not apply to someone holding a sign in the Right-of-Way.”
Zymaris also said that DOT is not charged with enforcing the law and defers to law enforcement as to when a probable violation necessitates an arrest be made.
A spokesman for the DESPP said the department does not comment on pending lawsuits, but that the Office of the Attorney General is representing Higgins in this litigation.
In an August letter to lawmakers related to the state police’s response to the protests and signs on highway overpasses, Higgins wrote that state law “prohibits attaching unauthorized signs on state highways, bridges, and overpasses, prohibits individuals from intentionally or recklessly obstructing traffic on the roadways, and prohibits the intentional blocking of public sidewalks.”
“Certain activities along our busy highways may pose a safety hazard by obstructing visibility or distracting motorists, thereby creating a risk of accidents,” Higgins noted in his letter. “I reject any assertion that Troopers are unfairly targeting certain overpass protestors based upon any perceived political or social affiliations.”
Barrett, however, said peacefully holding a protest sign on a sidewalk is as fundamental as it gets when it comes to people’s free speech rights.
“If the government can shut that down, then none of our freedoms are safe,” he said.
Discover more from InnerCity News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
