The Chief United States District Judge wrote, link;
The public has an interest in seeing public meetings conducted in a manner that respects attendees’ First Amendment rights.

In the Journal's one-sided coverage when we filed the complaint, link, the Journal offered;
Esquivel, an attorney specializing in First Amendment issues, said he is confident the board has not unfairly limited MacQuigg’s free speech rights.even quoting the First Amendment specialist;
“I’m very sensitive to how the law should work in terms of people having a right to express themselves, and I have absolutely no reservations about doing what we did as it pertains to Mr. MacQuigg,” Esquivel said.The Journal chose to not interview me for the article; presenting instead only Esquivel's side.
Well, Esquivel was wrong, and now we find he is scheduled to teach a continuing ed session for the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government, link entitled;
First amendment, open courtrooms and other issues in regard to access.In particular we find that Esquivel will present on the issues of;
Presented by Martin Esquivel and Greg Williams
- How to maintain order without infringing on constituents’ constitutional rights
- Who has access to public comment period? ... and
- Do photographers have access to public meetings, legislative committee hearings?
One wonders; what might the FOG be thinking?
There is a seminar that Esquivel is fully qualified to teach;
- How powerful politicians and public servants can bilk taxpayers out of hundreds of thousands of dollars; squandering the public trust and treasure on legal defenses that enjoy no real oversight, link, in an effort to litigate exceptions for themselves, from the law.

1 comment:
Oh my, that's just too ironic for words! Imagine my surprise when once again the outcome was not published in the Journal! NOT!
Post a Comment