North Carolina is still recovering from Hurricane Helene, with some families still living in campers and even tents & without running water. Foscoe Home Team works to provide famlies with food and other essentials. Visit their website for ways to help:
https://t.co/LPNQIO8vp8
@PimaSheriff I would choose your battles real carefully.
Because most of us are aware that there are a couple of prominent Civil rights attorney's in Pima county that would love to go after Nanos.
I have also sent an email to Jan Lesher. I encourage others to do the same.
It's no longer about SHOULD THEY BE THERE.
It's about their RIGHT TO BE THERE
This was mailed certified mail and it has been emailed.
This letter constitutes formal written notice that the directive you have reportedly issued to your deputies to issue criminal citations to any person caught live streaming in front of the Guthrie residence is unconstitutional on its face and as applied, is without lawful statutory authority, and will expose the Department, you in your individual and official capacities, and any deputy who acts on the directive, to civil liability under federal law. I am putting you on notice now so that no one can later claim ignorance of the law. Govern yourself accordingly.
I. The conduct you propose to criminalize is constitutionally protected activity.
Recording and live streaming from a public street or sidewalk is core, protected First Amendment activity. Public streets and sidewalks are the quintessential traditional public forum, and the act of recording matters of public concern and of disseminating that recording is protected speech and protected news-gathering. Every federal circuit to squarely address the question, including the Ninth Circuit, which governs Arizona, has recognized a clearly established right to record matters of public concern from public vantage points. A missing-person investigation that the County itself has authorized public attention to is a paradigmatic matter of public concern.
A person standing on public property, recording what is plainly visible from that public property, is exercising a constitutional right. It is not a crime, and it cannot be made one by a sheriff's order.
II. Your directive is a content- and medium-based restriction subject to strict scrutiny, and it fails.
Your directive does not target conduct generally. It singles out one activity live-streaming for criminal sanction. A restriction that targets a particular medium of expression and a particular subject of coverage is content- and medium-based, triggering strict scrutiny. To survive, it would have to be narrowly tailored to a compelling governmental interest and be the least restrictive means available.
A blanket criminal citation for the act of live-streaming from public space satisfies none of these requirements. It is also a prior restraint to the extent it is designed to suppress the broadcast before it occurs, and prior restraints bear a heavy presumption of unconstitutionality.
III. There is no statutory authority for the citations, and your deputies cannot manufacture a crime.
A criminal citation must rest on an existing criminal statute. To my knowledge, no Arizona statute criminalizes recording or live-streaming from a public place. Neither you nor your deputies have the authority to create a criminal offense by directive. Any attempt to shoehorn lawful recording into general statutes — harassment (A.R.S. § 13-2921), disorderly conduct (A.R.S. § 13-2904), loitering (A.R.S. § 13-2905), or trespass (A.R.S. §§ 13-1502 through 13-1504) — would be unconstitutional as applied to a person lawfully present on public property and would render any such citation void. Such an application would also be void for vagueness under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, because it would punish conduct that no statute defines as criminal and would invite arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.
For the avoidance of doubt: Arizona is a one-party-consent jurisdiction (A.R.S. §§ 13-3005, 13-3012). Recording — including audio — in a public place where no person has a reasonable expectation of privacy is lawful.
IV. You are acting contrary to the County's own express authorization.
I am informed that the County Administrator has already granted permission for the activity you now propose to criminalize. Your deputies would therefore be issuing criminal citations for conduct the County has expressly authorized. This eliminates any claim of a legitimate, let alone compelling, governmental interest, and it establishes that the directive is arbitrary, retaliatory, and outside the scope of any lawful law-enforcement function.
V. Liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 1988.
Any deputy who issues such a citation, and any official who orders it, acts under color of state law to deprive citizens of clearly established constitutional rights, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The exposure is not abstract:
Individual liability. Deputies who carry out the directive, and you as the official who issued it, face personal liability, including for compensatory and punitive damages.
Official-capacity and municipal (Monell) liability. Because this is a directive from the Sheriff — a final policymaker for the Department — it constitutes official policy. That means liability can attach to the County without the usual requirement of proving a pattern of prior violations; a single directive from a final policymaker is itself the policy.
Attorney's fees and costs. A prevailing plaintiff in a § 1983 action recovers attorney's fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988. Every citation issued multiplies that exposure.
VI. Qualified immunity will not shield you.
Qualified immunity bars damages only where the right at issue was not clearly established. The right to record matters of public concern from public property is clearly established in this Circuit. Moreover, qualified immunity provides no defense whatsoever against declaratory and injunctive relief. The directive can and will be enjoined regardless of any immunity argument.
VII. The relief that will be sought.
If you proceed, I am prepared to seek, and to support others in seeking:
A temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the directive — the deprivation of First Amendment freedoms, even briefly, constitutes irreparable harm as a matter of law, which makes injunctive relief readily available;
A permanent injunction and a declaratory judgment that the directive is unconstitutional;
Compensatory and punitive damages against each individual who issues or orders a citation;
Damages against the County under Monell;
Attorney's fees and costs under § 1988; and
Where citations are issued and later dismissed, state-law claims including false arrest, abuse of process, and malicious prosecution.
I happened to run across this w/ @CriminalNetworX & other you tube live streamers searching for Nancy Guthrie! This is for Liars & 'Haters' that say they've done nothing to search for Nancy. Streamers, including @JLRINVESTIGATES are multi-taskers. They Search, Document & Report!
🚨 IT'S OFFICIAL: The Trump DOJ has just BUSTED an Islamic terrorist plot in the United States, individuals in Kansas and California were found providing material support to ISIS
LAW AND ORDER! 🔥
AG TODD BLANCHE: "Young men in their 20s completely indoctrinated by terrorism and by terrorists and actually spending money to actually follow through on these attacks."
"One of their names written on a drone to kill Americans, one fantasized about about killing a female soldier by beheading her."
"I'm glad we were able to interject here and stop these these men but it's it's a good reminder to the Americans that that this fight is not over." @FBIDirectorKash@DAGToddBlanche
🚨 HOLY SMOKES. FBI Director Kash Patel reveals **3 MILLION** p*dophile accounts on the Tor network were taken down, plus a nearly 100% SURGE in child predator arrests
"7,200 kids that we found that got to go home. 3,400 child predators and traffickers arrested. That's up 99% from the best year Biden ever had. That means kids are being protected at levels that are simply unheard of!"
"And that means this FBI, here's another thing. We didn't just do the physical work on the streets. We went to the cyber community and we dismantled 3 million pedophile accounts off the Tor network where these predators prey on our children and think they can hide from this FBI."
"They can't. We are going to the ends of the earth and the cyber realm to make sure our most precious commodity kids are safeguarded."
"And the numbers speak for themselves because the FBI are putting kids first." @FBIDirectorKash@kayleighmcenany
@ginamilan_ Stranger things happen all the time. Maybe it wasn't Pratt's plan but it may well have been God's. Perhaps He has plans for Spencer to do something about it.
Nick Shirley exposed the CA voter fraud
Sign affidavit/swear you're telling the truth, is all that's req
- (200) ppl over 125 yrs old
- Dogs are voting
- (108) ppl reg in one house
- Woman voted (4) times, but was dead
Why are they getting away with it
Ps, if someone would be willing to click my blog link and just let me know if it's working, I'd appreciate that. It's a new blog and I just want to make sure that's working like it should. TY!
🚨BREAKING: A petition demanding the officers involved in arresting Henry Nowak are prosecuted has just hit 130,000
It's gaining thousands every hour.
All of Britain demands JUSTICE! 🇬🇧
HAPPY BIRTHDAY! Secretary of War Pete Hegseth turns 46 today.
From serving in Iraq and Afghanistan to leading the Pentagon, Hegseth has spent decades advocating for America's warfighters and national defense.
Pima County Sheriff NANOS Accused of Overreach and Abuse of Power AGAIN. Is Nanos the worst sheriff in America people are asking?
Deputies are saying there is a mandatory cite/arrest order from Sheriff Nanos in one specific neighborhood — and that if they respond to a 911 call, they must cite or arrest when possible or face discipline.
That is not normal discretion. That sounds like pressure from the top. Possible lawsuits coming directly at Sheriff Nanos.
Why is Nancy Guthrie neighborhood getting this kind of special enforcement while the rest of Pima County is still dealing with crime, drugs, theft, and slow response times? Sheriff Nanos using selective enforcement and violating our rights as citizens.
The public deserves answers.
What is the policy?
Who ordered it?
Why only this area?
And is this about public safety — or politics?
No wonder deputies voted no confidence in Sheriff Nanos.
🚨 BREAKING: In a powerful moment on the anniversary of D-Day, SecWar Pete Hegseth GOES HARD against European nations who opened their borders to 3rd world migrants
"Sadly, today, different European beaches are STORMED by different DANGEROUS ideologies. Spain, Italy, Greece, Bulgaria — boats and MEN arrive. WHEN will European capitals do something about THAT invasion?"
🔥🔥🔥
"Or is it too late? I pray not, and I believe not."
"The men who fought and died here restored freedom to Europe. That freedom must be maintained by this generation of leaders and war fighters, or what they fought for, was merely temporary!"
"As our great President Ronald Reagan once said, freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction."
"You don't pass it to the next generation in the bloodstream. It must be defended by each and every generation. We stand by our allies, and we expect our allies capable and ready to stand alongside us. The heroes of 1944 did that, and may we."
PERFECTLY SAID.