LibraryLaw Blog

Judge rules for library in patron lawsuit

A federal judge in Ohio ruled in favor of the Clark County Public Library on Aug. 20 with regard to the lawsuit by a patron who contested a ban on his use of the library for two years.

For great detail, see the court filings at Justia.

Also, Justia has updated court documents on other library cases there.  If you know of other pending federal district court cases of interest to libraries, let me know and I'll see if they can be added.

Panhandling and libraries

Interview with Mark Weinberg, Chicago civil rights attorney with a specialty in panhandling cases

Minow: When can a library tell people not to panhandle or solicit - e.g. on the sidewalk leading up to the library front doors?

Weinberg: Nobody should be permitted to block the entrance to any building anywhere, including a library.  And laws are already on the books that prohibit this.   Should there be special restrictions on panhandling?  Most cities have so-called "Aggressive Panhandling Laws" that  impose special restrictions on people who panhandle by, for example,  prohibiting people from panhandling in certain locations, like within 10 feet of a cash station or 10 feet within a bus stop.  Some of those restrictions make sense. Panhandler or not, nobody should be allowed to hover over anybody at or near a cash station.  That act is a threatening in and of itself.   But, generally speaking, the public space, like public sidewalks, should be open to everyone.  So, my answer is that if a person who is panhandling is on the public space and not blocking the passage of anyone, he or she should not be arrested for the act.  And, no, it shouldn't matter if it's close to a library.      

Minow:  Would the same apply to people with political petitions, girl scout cookies or other solicitation?

Weinberg: Yes. The law should be the same for everyone, but as enforced in the real-world, there's definitely a double standard, meaning commercial solicitors like, say, newspaper vendors or people passing out a new high-fiber breakfast cereal are rarely, if ever, interfered with by the cops. People goo gaga over their free samples.  But panhandlers get arrested all the time for the same activity.  This is especially odd since, under the law, commercial speech has generally received less First Amendment protection than political speech, but in the real-world commercial solicitation actually gets treated much more generously.  Why?  This is
America; we love our commerce. 

Minow:  What about after hours? For example, Los Angeles enacted an ordinance http://lapd.com/article.aspx?&a=2475   prohibiting the public from loitering outside libraries between 9 p.m. and 9 a.m.  What do you think about that?

Weinberg: After-hour restrictions on panhandling are quite popular today. Most Cities impose such restrictions.  And such restrictions have been upheld as constitutionally-permissible.  And in theory such reasonable restrictions don't bother me, but in practice they do.  That's because in practice cops use these reasonable restrictions to interfere with lawful, innocent and peaceful panhandling activity.   In  Chicago, for example, the "Aggressive Panhandling" law limits panhandling within 10 feet of a cash station, but the cops, when the mood strikes them, arrest panhandlers for panhandling within 10 feet of any building that has a cash station within it, which basically allows the cops to arrest panhandlers with impunity, which they do.   So, the problem is the misuse and misapplication of these reasonable restrictions.  The problem isn't the laws; it's their unreasonable applications.

Patron Policies and Latchkey Children webcast - July 19

I'm working on a forthcoming Infopeople webcast, Patron Policies and Latchkey Children Update

If you have items you think I should discuss, please comment.  The description is:

Does your library issue rules for patron behavior, i.e. odor, harassment, bare feet? Do you have a policy on young children unattended in the library? What types of rules are (and are not!) likely to be legally enforceable? This webcast analyzes lawsuits against libraries, and pulls together a legal framework to guide you in writing, revising and enforcing policies.

Webcast: July 19, 2007
Time: 12pm-1pm
Speaker: Mary Minow

Unattended children in Oregon libraries, an interview with Curtis Kiefer

Minow:  Curtis, at the Oregon Library Association Legal Ease pre-conference, you mentioned that Oregon has a law that applies to unattended children left in a public libraries.  Could you tell us more about it?

Kiefer:  Six years ago when we were reviewing our code of conduct for the library, we were going through a period when many young children were being left at  the library for extended periods (4-8 hours) or not being picked up at library  closing time.  As we often do, we look at what Oregon law has to say on a  particular issue, write our policy and have it reviewed by our City Attorney.  We found that the statute cited below could be applied to libraries.

Minow: Is there a specific age that the law applies to?

Kiefer: I am including the language in the Oregon Revised Statutes (2005) that addresses age.

163.545 Child neglect in the second degree.

(1) A person having custody or control of a child under 10 years of age commits the crime of child neglect in the  second degree if, with criminal negligence, the person leaves the child  unattended in or at any place for such period of time as may be likely to endanger  the health or welfare of such child.

(2) Child neglect in the second degree is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743  §174; 1991 c.832 §2]

So far we have invoked this once when a father loudly announced to his young daughter that he was leaving because she wouldn't get off an educational software computer.   He left, we called the home where the mother responded with, "Oh he does that," and then we called the police.   Once the police became involved (I believe he received a citation) he threatened to sue the library.  Once legal counsel was consulted he found that he didn't have a case.  That was the last we heard of the incident. 

Hooray - I figured out how to use tags instead of categories in this blog

As I suspected, it's much easier and more flexible.  So if any of you are looking for new posts based on categories, you may not find them. Use the technorati tags at the bottom of a post instead. If it works like I think it will, I'll probably stop using categories altogether.

Update: It looks as if users who click on a technorati tag below will get everyone in the world's posts with those tags. That's useful, but it would be nice to have an option to limit it to this blog, the way flickr does.  Well, there's always the search button in the blog...

Law of Libraries and Archives

Just discovered a website on the Law of Libraries and Archives, by Bryan M. Carson. It's an adjunct to his book published in December 2006 by Scarecrow Press, which I just ordered :>

Law for Librarians

"Legal Ease: What Staff, Administrators, and Trustees Need to Know about Libraries and the Law,"  is a preconference sponsored by the Oregon Library Association on April 18, 2007. Even if you can't make it to Corvallis, check out the slew of useful legal materials for libraries that OLA has posted (with permission) from the ALA Law for Librarians conference last spring. 

More crazy legislation - library staff as sexual offender check-in officers

One of the craziest library bills of all time was reintroduced in the Florida Legislature yesterday.

S1804    GENERAL BILL by Posey
Sexual Offenders/Public Libraries; prohibits certain specified sexual offenders whose victim was under age of 18 from entering public library without immediately notifying employee of public library of sex offender's presence & intent to use resources of library; prohibits sex offender from entering library until employee acknowledges presence of offender; provides that offender who violates act commits felony of third degree; provides criminal penalties, etc. Amends 947.1405, 948.30.
  EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2007
    02/21/07 SENATE Filed

Minow take:   I worked in public libraries for ten years.  We all want to protect the children, but putting library staff in this role is untenable. As I asked last year, does this mean library staff must then keep an eye on the patron?  Is there funding for extra staff to do this?  What kind of relationship does this really entail, and does it put the library employee at some risk?  Will there be an expectation that the librarian will keep the offender away from the children... and if so, what if she fails?

Giving libraries money for security guards is a much better idea.

Does your library have an appeals process for patrons who you've banned from the library?

A librarian asked me to recommend a strong sample appeals process policy for a public library.  When a library tells a user to leave the library for six months, takes away the user's Internet use, etc. courts say the library should have an appeals process so the patron can make his case. 

If your library has a good appeals process that seems to work (e.g. tested through use), please comment.

May a public university stop a traveling envangelist from giving speeches on the grassy lawn outside the library?

Yes, at least in the 7th Circuit. In a clearly written opinion, Judge Posner dispenses with public forum analysis, saying that this case "falls into a crack between the rules."  A public university can decide who can make speeches on its lawn, if it uses content neutral criteria.  A rule limiting use to the university's own members plus those they invite to speak is sufficiently content neutral.

What is true is that a university that decided to permit its open spaces to be used by some outsiders could not exclude others just because it disapproved of their message. E.g., Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of University of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819, 828-30, 132 L. Ed. 2d 700 (1995). But it could use neutral criteria for access, such as that an outsider must be invited to speak on campus by a faculty member or a student group. American Civil Liberties Union v. Mote, supra, 423 F.3d at 444. The difference between invited and uninvited visitors is fundamental to a system of property rights.

Gilles v Blanchard, 200 U.S. App. LEXIS 3234 (Feb. 14, 2007) - has satellite photo of the grounds