State appeals ruling in Occupy Nashville case

Tuesday, July 2, 2013 at 5:31pm

The two state commissioners that helped institute “new rules” for Occupy Nashville protesters on War Memorial Plaza in 2011 are appealing a federal judge’s ruling against the state.

Department of General Services Commissioner Steve Cates and Department of Safety and Homeland Security Commissioner Bill Gibbons filed the appeal through the state attorney general’s office on June 27.

In an opinion last month, U.S. District Court Judge Aleta Trauger criticized Cates and Gibbons for failing to consult with the attorney general before creating rules that led to the arrest of Occupy protesters. The appeal challenges Trauger's denial of qualified immunity and the findings of constitutional violations.

Trauger ruled that Cates and Gibbons were liable for damages to Occupy protesters both in their capacities as state officials and individually.

The appeal will go to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for review.

13 Comments on this post:

By: pswindle on 7/2/13 at 6:08

Good Grief! I'm so sick of Haslam and his buddies.

By: Kosh III on 7/3/13 at 6:07

Republicans still hate the First Amendment

By: yucchhii on 7/3/13 at 7:55

Criminals that are allowed to run a state or the country for that, what did you expect, For them to do RIGHT? LMAO!! I'm not mad at anyone who THOUGHT they were VOTING. I keep telling people that the VOTING system does NOT work anymore. I know this for a FACT, I knew someone who was in a position that would KNOW this! It's all PREdetermined. By the time you get to the polls, it's already been decided. Insted of argiung with me about something that is fact, why not look at all the CRIMINALS running this country over the years. If your vote actually counted, would there not have been somebody worthy to do what needs to be done to get this country right by now? Look at JFK, he's dead because he TRIED to do something right. I rest my case!!

By: yucchhii on 7/3/13 at 7:57

Oh yeah, I say AGAIN.... The occupy protestors struck a nerve, the criminals in office obviously have things to hide...why else would they have done what they did?

By: C.A.Jones on 7/3/13 at 8:55

Why else would they have done what they did? Oh.. I don't know... How about.......

1. The Occupy protesters are morons. They needed to be arrested in order to taste a bit of reality. The Gov't shouldn't pay your student loans back, clearly you learned nothing in school.

2. They were a safety hazard. Not only to me and the rest of the public at large, but also to themselves. I thought maybe they should have been put to rest, luckily for them the State only arrested them.

3. Occupy protesters are dirty. They needed a bath. I wanted to bath them on the spot with fire hoses, somebody disagreed. Again, probably worked out better for them that way.

4. Most people in TN wanted to see them hauled off the Plaza. I would have preferred they get a job, instead of bitching about not having one.

By: Rocket99 on 7/3/13 at 9:42

yucchhii, where's your hard facts? Please produce them.

C.A.Jones, you should be arrested for wanting to deny people their constitutional rights. Doesn't matter whether you agree with the people or not, their rights are guaranteed by the Constitution. If the appointed officials willingly violated these rights, then they need to pay the price. How our rights work don't change just because a person or group doesn't like what's happening.

By: parkadvocate99 on 7/3/13 at 12:11

Everybody has a right to petition their government if they have a grievance. If it weren't for people protesting,we'd all be British subjects. Happy Fourth of July!

By: nbc2k on 7/3/13 at 12:32

Hey C.A. jones its your american right to free speech and protest. You must not believe in freedom, because its not what we are having at this time.

By: govskeptic on 7/5/13 at 4:57

Should the Attorney General's office supply one of their attorneys to accompany
each of the State's Commissioner's to assist in every decision they must make?
Protesting is a protected right-squatting and camping on public property is not.
That's the true jest of this case.

By: ancienthighway on 7/6/13 at 12:11

Jest indeed. The comic acrobatics on both sides was amusing. Now if you meant jist, how do you get a bunch of politicians who are full of themselves to pay attention to things other than guns, religion, and women's rights? Okay, I admit there are a few that feel Tennessee is going to be invaded by the federal government, Muslims, and terrorists, and even those that think all three are the same.

But to tell a rich politician that they aren't leaving enough for the others to live, they won't listen even if you get in their face as Occupy Nashville tried with their vigil.

By: bfra on 7/6/13 at 4:05

gov. - You are so right, there is a definite difference in protesting & squatting/camping on public property. Something is wrong with people that can't see the difference.

By: pswindle on 7/8/13 at 10:55

Can we appeal Haslam election?

By: WmTharonChandler on 7/9/13 at 10:40

Some People had no recourse but to suffer bismal conditions in personing an 'Occupy' movement, (when they would rather have simply had a job to go to or maybe a simi-trailer truck, to drive for pay) but this was just too much pain upon the arrogance of some TN Leg cronies .

I applaud for judge Arleta in this case and may peace prevail on Earth (and not in 'occupy movements') .

W. Tharon Chandler