Civil Liberties and Gang Injunctions

9/22/2009 - One attempt to break the cycle of violence has been to enact to gang injunctions. The court order basically puts limits on the movement of alleged gang members within a certain area, without having to provide a judge with any proof of a crime. San Francisco has one on the Norteño gang, and now another Bay Area city is considering doing the same.

A recent rash of violence in Fairfield led the City to also seek an injunction against members of the Norteños. The proposal covers four square miles in central Fairfield. The City of Fairfield has named 28 people on the injunction, but commentator Andre Segura, a Civil Liberties Fellow at the ACLU, says he worries about the implications.

AUDIO TRANSCRIPT

There's little we Americans treasure more than our freedom. Freedom to go where we want and talk to whom we want. Freedom to work, eat and meet where we want. And if something goes wrong and we're accused of a crime, we treasure the freedom to have our day in court.

A sizeable number of people living in Fairfield may soon find these freedoms taken away. The City of Fairfield wants to impose permanent restrictions on the movement and actions of up to 250 of its residents, without having to provide a judge with any proof of a crime. The City has proposed what's known as a gang injunction. A court order meant to reduce crime in violence prone areas.

Sounds reasonable, perhaps.

But the injunction will essentially create a secondary class of residents. People who will be under permanent probation without any meaningful opportunities to defend themselves. In a request for the gang injunction, the City listed 28 individuals by name. But the City is also seeking permission to include close to 250 other unnamed people. Those listed in the request include a young man named Mario Huezo, not affiliated with any gang, who was horrified when he recently woke up for work, at 4:30 AM, pick up the paper, and saw his name listed. But at least he got notice in time to appeal. More than anyone who isn't on the original list.

The proposed injunction covers four square miles. All of Central Fairfield. This includes the City's main financial and shopping areas, government offices, and schools. Once served, an individual would respirator, and jail time, simply by being in the same general area as someone else who's been served.

Go to the grocery store for milk, and if another alleged gang member walks in, you're in violation. Walk outside your house at night to empty the trash, you're in violation. And remember, this is without anyone actually providing evidence to a judge of any crime.

In 2007, the City of San Francisco proposed a similar injunction. The San Francisco Superior Court ordered that the City's injunction only operate against people who had been individually named, and who had the opportunity to defend themselves in front of a judge. In that case, the ACLU and the City of San Francisco collaborated to create a fair and effective process to get out of the injunction.

Fairfield's injunction is currently under consideration by the Superior Court in Solano County. The Court should, at the very least, require the police to present evidence about each individual that they want to serve. And the Court should create a clear way out for anyone who is not an active gang member. It's the only way preserve some of the freedoms we all hold dear.

Andre Segura is a former Civil Liberties Fellow for the ACLU of Northern California.