ACLU OF Utah Sues Salt Lake County Over Unlawful Detention of College Student
Uroza v. Salt Lake County (2011)
On August 5, 2011, the ACLU of Utah with cooperating attorney B. Kent Morgan of The Dyer Law Group filed a complaint in federal district court on behalf of 22-year-old college student Enrique Uroza. The complaint was filed in response to an incident in which Mr. Uroza was held at the Salt Lake County Metro Jail (Metro) for 39 days after his family posted the court-ordered bail. Mr. Uroza was held pursuant to an unconstitutional jail policy, which purportedly gives the jail authority to hold individuals who cannot prove to the satisfaction of jail officials that they are lawfully present in the United States. This policy subjects individuals to unlawful detention, thereby depriving individuals of their personal liberty without due process of law, in violation of the United States Constitution.

On March 26, 2012, an amended complaint was filed alleging that officials and agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”), an agency of the Department of Homeland Security, are responsible in part for the unconstitutional and illegally prolonged imprisonment of 23-year-old Enrique Uroza. The amended complaint also adds the United States as a defendant, alleging that its agents caused Mr. Uroza to be unlawfully deprived of his liberty.

Read more >>

Lawsuit Against UDOT Over Continued Unconstitutional Restrictions on Free Speech
iMatter Utah v. Utah Department of Transportation (2011)
On July 8, 2011, the ACLU of Utah and cooperating attorneys Brian M. Barnard and Stewart Gollan of the Utah Legal Clinic filed an amended complaint on behalf of iMatter Utah. iMatter Utah is challenging as unconstitutional the Utah Department of Transportation’s (UDOT) requirements that event organizers, such as iMatter Utah, obtain large liability insurance policies and collect releases of liability from all event participants prior to the staging of any event or protest on UDOT property. iMatter Utah is a volunteer organization comprised primarily of students, that works to promote public discussion and education on the issue of climate change. iMatter Utah has no organizational funding or fundraising ability, and thus cannot afford to pay the high insurance premium prices necessary in order to hold an event on UDOT property. Salt Lake City makes exceptions for events held by groups such as iMatter Utah that have no fundraising ability, however, UDOT makes no such exceptions. UDOT’s stringent liability requirements have made it effectively impossible for iMatter Utah to hold any events on UDOT property, thus violating iMatter Utah members’ First Amendment rights to free speech and expression. The complaint was amended to reflect iMatter Utah’s desire to host an event partially on UDOT property on September 24, and the inability to do so because of UDOT’s liability requirements.

Read more >>

ACLU And NILC File Lawsuit Challenging Utah “Show Me Your Papers” Law
Utah Coalition of La Raza v. Herbert (2011)
On May 3, 2011, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Utah, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), and the law firm of Munger, Tolles, & Olsen filed a class action lawsuit in federal district court challenging Utah’s HB 497. HB 497 gives law enforcement the authority to demand “papers” demonstrating citizenship or immigration status during traffic stops, much like Arizona’s SB 1070. The lawsuit charged that HB 497 is unconstitutional in that it violates the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, Fourth Amendment, Equal Protection Clause, and the right to travel. The federal district court promptly blocked implementation of the law. In an Order issued Tuesday, February 21, Judge Clark Waddoups announced that he will wait to issue a decision on our request for a Preliminary Injunction (“PI”) in UCLR v. Herbert (“UCLR”), Utah’s HB 497 “Show Me Your Papers” lawsuit, until the Supreme Court issues its decision in an Arizona case that raises similar legal questions to some of the issues raised here in Utah.

Read more >>

Booksellers, Artists, ACLU Seek to Bar Utah Law Restricting Speech on Internet
Florence v. Shurtleff (Amended 2011)
On June 9, 2005, the ACLU of Utah, along with cooperating attorneys from Howrey LLP, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and the Media Coalition, originaly filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of H.B. 260, “Amendments Related to Pornographic and Harmful Materials,” passed during the 2005 Utah Legislative General Session, citing free speech and interstate commerce violations. In August 2006, the district court entered a stipulated preliminary injunction, which blocked the enforcement of the challenged sections of the statute.

On June 8, 2011, the ACLU of Utah along with a coalition of booksellers, media companies, and artists asked the federal district court in Salt Lake City to issue a permanent injunction, barring enforcement of a Utah statute that restricts constitutionally-protected speech on the Internet. Utah’s law seeks to regulate all Internet speech that may be considered “harmful to minors.” This law, however, is too sweeping in its scope, as it would result in restrictions on visual art, photography, graphic novels, and information about sexual health and the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth.

Read more >>

Return to top of page