Finding That Defendant Had Yanked on Israeli Flag Plaintiff Had Tied Around Neck, Choking Her, Leads to 3-Yard Stay-Away Order Against Defendant
From Monday’s decision by Judge Trevor McFadden (D.D.C.) in Sumrall v. Ali:
Plaintiff Kimmara Sumrall and Defendant Janine Ali frequently attend protests about the war in Gaza. The problem is that they are on opposite sides. Last fall, Sumrall proudly displayed her Jewish heritage at a protest by tying an Israeli flag around her neck. She alleges that Ali approached her from behind and yanked it, choking her. “If speech provokes wrongful acts on the part of hecklers, the government must deal with those wrongful acts directly.” Sumrall asks for a modest stay-away order against Ali so that she feels comfortable continuing to attend pro-Israel protests and counter-protests. The Court grants her preliminary injunction request….
Sumrall has shown that she is likely to succeed on the merits of her 42 U.S.C. § 1981 claim. The statute declares:
“All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens ….” …
The parties contest (1) whether Ali purposefully discriminated against Sumrall and (2) whether that action deprived her of the “equal benefit of all laws” “for the security of persons.” Neither side questions whether Sumrall is part of a racial minority within the meaning of the statute. See Shaare Tefila Congregation v. Cobb (1987) (holding that Jews are a racial minority protected by § 1981). The Court takes each dispute in turn.
First, Sumrall has sufficiently shown that Ali purposefully discriminated against her on the basis of race. A preponderance of the evidence reveals that Ali likely committed the battery. Officer Bonney’s testimony described the event in detail, how Ali committed it, and that Sumrall reacted strongly, clearly, and immediately. He testified that Ali confessed her behavior as he arrested her. Having considered Officer Bonney’s demeanor and responses at the recent hearing, the Court finds him to be a highly credible witness. He was the only truly neutral witness who appeared in the criminal trial or at the preliminary injunction hearing.
Meredith Wallace, who testified for the defense at the criminal trial, attended the November protest to support Code Pink. To credit Ali’s version of events, the Court would have to assume that both Officer Bonney and Sumrall were committing perjury, even though they have no prior association and Officer Bonney was unconnected to either side.
Granted, as Ali argues, the Superior Court acquitted Ali of simple assault because the evidence did not rise beyond a reasonable doubt. But this Court ev
Article from Reason.com
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.
