Skip to content

Warden To Challenge “transparently Invalid” Orders In Tucson City Court

July 24, 2010
via email …..
CSII Press
7/24/2010

Mexican Flag Burner Claims: “Municipal Court Judges, Sua Sponte, Do Not Have the Authority to Suspend First Amendment Rights.”

CSII Press
Tucson Arizona
July  24, 2010

Several years ago, in response to Tucson City Court Judge Hays’ numerous threats to suspend his First Amendment rights, Warden, the Notorious Mexican Flag Burner, held a public rally in Library Square and defiantly told Judge Hays and the rest of the Tucson Municipal Court Judges: “Don’t Let Your Mouths Run Up What Your Asses Can’t Register!”

The judges responded by issuing a series of court orders preventing Warden from coming within 1,000 feet of the corner of Pennington and Stone, a location where Warden had conducted the Tucson Weekly Public Forum since 2006, effectively suspending Warden’s First Amendment rights.

On January 14, 2009 Warden was arrested for arriving on Library Square to give a speech excoriating local public officials for engaging in “Open Border Policy” in violation of federal law, intentionally defying court orders which he claims are  “transparently invalid” or “void on their face”  and therefore constitutionally  and legally unenforceable, setting the stage for a legal challenge which may end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The legal issue has never before been directly addressed because no judge has been stupid enough to issue such an order sua sponte, or, if he did, no lawyer had the guts to get in his face and take him on,” says Warden.

“What the Tucson Police Department did on January 14, 2009 is EXACTLY what the First Amendment was written to prevent,” Warden says.

Warden contends that via the legal process of injunction, upon application for relief by an allegedly aggrieved party, the courts lawfully may temporarily suspend First Amendment rights without violating the 14th Amendment, or what is known as “due process.”

Although it was a bitterly divided court, the temporary suspension of First Amendment rights was first upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Walker v Birmingham, a classic civil rights case involving Dr. Martin Luther King.

It was also upheld in Arizona v Chavez, which raised the same issue regarding the conduct of United Farm Workers Union President Cesar Chavez, who ironically,  defied a lawfully issued injunction and picketed a Yuma farmer for using Illegal Mexican Labor.

Warden contends that, (1) if the state had moved for an injunction to block his speech, and, (2) the court had granted the motion, (3) Warden could have stayed the order, with his rights remaining intact, while the order was appealed.

“The process of injunction to temporarily suspend First Amendment rights has safeguards to insure rights are protected,” Warden says, “but these guys kept me locked down for more than a year.

“When Tucson City Court Judges suspend First Amendment rights, sua sponte, they violate the Rule of Law, engage in judicial tyranny and stain the integrity of the court.”

On July 22, 2010 Tucson City Court Thomas Berning set forth a briefing schedule to determine: (1) what exactly is a transparently invalid order, and (2) under what circumstances, (if any),  may the state enforce such an order.

Oral argument is expected in late August.

For further information, Please Contact:

Roy Warden
roywarden@cox.net

For Reprint or Republication, Click Here

2 Comments leave one →
  1. roy warden permalink
    July 24, 2010 11:19 pm

    Erika;

    Rejoice. The America flag burning case, Texas v Johnson, DOES protect burning the flag of ANY nation, including Mexico.

    I was arrested for Burning the Mexican Flag on two occassions and I litigated that issue for two years before a local judge ruled in my favor and dismissed the case.

    My ruling is NOT binding on any other jurisdiction, but I would welcome the opportunity to travel to any part of our country, burn a flag in defiance of local ordinances, and test the law.

    To read all about it, Please click, or cut and paste here:

  2. July 24, 2010 6:24 pm

    A special rule was passed to protect the American Flag. The Mexican or any foreign flag is not covered by that rule. It can be claimed it is an insult to the country it represent but since it was done in this country and it was a response to the claims of the Latino Protesters regarding rights they do not have. Personally it angers me to see on TV foreign people weaving a Mexican flag, insulting and challenging this nation on our land, and wished someone would take that flag from them and burn it so….However the Judge opened an interesting point when it suspended Warden’s First Amendment Rights. She has to explain on what ground and authority and I hope Warren will pursue that forcefully.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: