Iowa Supreme Court sides with Tinker after much debate over First Amendment

Tinker v. Des Moines is a very influential court case regarding freedom of speech within schools. Marybeth Tinker and her brother John Tinker both wore black armbands to school in support of a truce in the Vietnam War and were punished and sent home from school in December 1965. In a 7-2 decision, the court sided with the Tinker’s after the parents sued the school.

John and Marybeth Tinker grew up in a small Iowa town. Their parents were very active in the Civil Rights Movement. During the time, there was only one black family in their town and they weren’t allowed to use the public swimming pool. This didn’t fly with the Tinker’s. Mr. Tinker was a pastor in the small town, and after he tried to do something about the family that wasn’t allowed into the swimming pool his contract at the church was not renewed. This caused them to move to Des Moines to a church, and the same thing happened there after he was helping black people. “By the time the war in Vietnam was building up, it was natural for us to be opposed to it,” explained John Tinker. Growing up in a family who was so open and helping in this day in age wasn’t the norm. John and Marybeth take after their parents in this way.

In December of 1965 when they decided they were going to wear the black armbands to school, the faculty held a meeting to acknowledge this because they saw it as a problem. They created a policy that stated anyone to wear the armbands to school would be asked to remove them, and failure to obey the policy would result in suspension. Marybeth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt wore them one day and were sent home. Marybeth stated, “I decided to go ahead and try to be brave like other kids I had seen on the news as examples.” The next day, John wore one and it ended in the same result. When John was called into the office and his mother was called, she agreed that John ought to be able to express his beliefs.

The suppression of student speech often happens because students speak out about issues the school is causing, but this was a different case. The Tinker family ended up suing the Des Moines Independent Community School District for violating their right of expression and proposed an injunction to the court to prevent the school from disciplining students for this reason. Little did they know, this was a four year long battle.

The Tinkers were forced to appeal to the Supreme Court directly after the district court dismissed the case on a tied voting count. During the oral argument on November 12, 1968, Dan L. Johnson, the Tinker’s lawyer stated, “I think they intended, I think they chose the message, chose the method of expression, your honor, which would not be distracting — distracting when they are in class.” Supreme Court Justice Byron R. White replied, “Physically, it wouldn’t make a noise, it wouldn’t cause a commotion but don’t you think it would cause some people to direct their attention to the armband and the Vietnam War and think about that rather than what they were thinking about — supposed to be thinking about in the classroom?” Although Justice White may be right, this doesn’t mean the students aren’t allowed to do so in the eyes of the law and the First Amendment.

The court’s final decision ruled a 7-2 decision in favor of the Tinker’s. The court concluded that students don’t lose their First Amendment rights when they enter a school. The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” In order to make a policy such as the one they made about the armbands in 1965, the school has to prove that the actions would interfere with school operations. Wearing the armbands was a silent act, that may have caused slight distractions. It did not interfere with school operations.

In my opinion, I think John and Marybeth Tinker had every right to wear the black armbands to school. It didn’t disrupt or harm anyone. It was a silent form of showing their stance on the Vietnam War. According to Dan Johnson, in this school, there was no general prohibition against political emblems like the armbands. Therefore, I think the move to make a policy against them was biased for the situation. I believe one of the major reasons why the students found themselves in so much trouble is because the opinion they sided with was an uncommon opinion. During the time this happened, it was much more rare for someone to have an opposing opinion such as this. I side with the Supreme Court’s decision.

Tinker vs. Des Moines is used today as an example for students’ right to free speech. This case has also been cited in many cases after having to do with freedom of speech in schools. Marybeth Tinker has created a tour called “Tinker Tour”. She goes around the US and teaches students about her story and also teaches them about civics in general. Both John and Marybeth think it is extremely important for students to be informed about the First Amendment, which is a major reason for the Tinker Tour.

Chapter 10 Obscenity and Indecency

Dear Aspiring Reporter,

I will go into depth on the topic of obscenity and indecency. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) defines indecent speech as “material that, in context, depicts or describes sexual or excretory organs or activities in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium.” Sexual expression is something that has always been in history, and continues to be a part of it as well. Now, we just have more guidelines for what is clearly prohibited and allowed with the issue. Many times sexual expression is known as pornography. This is a vague term because it includes both protected and unprotected sexual material. Today, there are certain guidelines for the government to prove something obscene without First Amendment protection. These include:

• arouses sexual lust
• is hard-core pornography
• has no serious social value

If the government cannot prove the above criteria, it is not considered obscene. As I’m sure most know, it is completely illegal to make, distribute, or possess material showing children/youth in sexual situations. This is child pornography. The First Amendment does not protect this, and this is never okay. This protects children from the abuse in these situations.

There are certain website domains that are “.adult” or “.porn”, which are obviously inappropriate websites. An interesting fact about these are that Taylor Swift actually purchased the domains of “TaylorSwift.porn” and “TaylorSwift.adult” so that people could not use her name for these inappropriate services. It has been an ongoing venture of trying to stop children having access to these types of websites. The CDA made it illegal to knowingly transmit “patently offensive messages” to recipients under 18 years of age.

Sexual expression can be found in art, commercials, websites, social media, movies, and on TV. It is hard to escape it. According to the book, there is little agreement on what is actually found protected or what is illegal. The FCC are the ones who determine the rules and regulations for indecency for the media.

Some companies such as McDonalds, Chick-fil-a, Panera, Subway, and Starbucks specifically block pornographic websites from their Wifi. This decision came after a campaign by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation and Enough is Enough with an online petition to have porn free wifi.

What to take from this is that the First Amendment protects indecent material except on broadcast television and radio. This may be an uncomfortable topic, but while you are going to be working in the media, it is important to be informed about it. This is something that won’t ever go away. For more information, visit https://www.fcc.gov

Chapter 5: Libel (Defenses and Privileges)

Dear Aspiring Reporter,

Libel is a very common term within the journalism and media world. Suppose you were covering a story about a meeting between college employees and made an accusation that some people lied in that meeting and wrote about it and published it. They could then sue you for libel. Libel is defined as, “a published false statement that is damaging to a person’s reputation; a written defamation.” To be successful in a case such as this, a libel defendant needs to strengthen their position by showing as many of the following as possible:

• The story was investigated thoroughly
• Interviews were conducted with people who had knowledge of facts related to the story, including the subject of the report.
• Previously published material was not relied on.
• Biased stories were not relied on.
• The reporting was careful, systematic, and painstaking.
• Multiple viewpoints were sought and, when possible, included in the report.
• There was a willingness to retract or correct if facts warranted such action.
• If applicable, there was a demonstrable deadline.
• There was no ill will or hatred toward the plaintiff.

Knowing the information bulleted above can also help while reporting. If you make sure you are doing all of this, you will be less likely to lose a libel case in the court of law.

Sometimes keeping the public informed on concerning topics that could affect the people are more important than worrying about avoiding the damage to individual reputations. This is known as the fair report privilege. This gives reporters a way to report on official governmental topics without having to prove the truth of what the government says. This also means a reporter can rely on government documents for information and assume it is true. But, to be sure you are protected, the source of the statement should be clearly noted in the news report. Also remember that not all states recognize the fair report privilege.

Fair comment and criticism “is a common law privilege that protects critics from lawsuits brought by individuals in the public eye. It is important to know the difference between a fact and an opinion. Technically, by placing themselves in the public eye, they are inviting criticism. For example, do you ever see tabloids about celebrities that are probably based completely off of rumors? This is what we are talking about here. This also includes any businesses that allow reviews, etc. Fair comment and criticism makes it so citizens are able to talk about their own opinions without being accused of libel, including reporters. In the book it states, “If a statement has two possible meanings- and one is defamatory and one is not- a jury decides how the words are understood.” This is known as double entendres.

With social media being huge, it is essential to understand that you can be sued for libel on the web as well. According to legal experts, defamation cases tied to social media are on the rise. When you put something out on the internet, it’s hard telling if you can ever fully delete it. It is most likely always going to be out there. This is why it makes it difficult for a plaintiff who has suffered online defamation to recover damages from a website. Every day, there are so many defamatory tweets being sent out.

Remember, there is no reason to be scared of libel, just make sure you are very careful while reporting and do your research and ask professionals for their best tips on the matter. For any further information please contact me at leuckt@uni.edu.

Tess Leuck

Chapter 3: Speech Distinctions

Dear Aspiring Reporter,

There are many important criteria you should know about speech distinctions. During periods of national instability, fear of war, the freedom of expression becomes more susceptible to government restraint. While you work for the media, it is important to know what to say and what not to say. The Supreme Court has established that offensive oppression is protected by the Constitution. This is because of freedom of expression including both cognitive and emotional elements of expression.

Unfortunately, the First Amendment doesn’t protect the rights of minors, public school students, or campus media differently from others. According to class book, “Sometimes courts have accepted the idea that the nation’s interest in developing its youth outweighs the free speech rights of public school students” One situation in schools was library books. If the free speech rights were the same in schools, they wouldn’t be able to remove certain books they found “inappropriate”. This is no longer allowed. Schools obviously must have age appropriate materials, therefore 50 Shades of Grey is not going to be in an elementary library, which prevents the removing of books. The court says, “Access to controversial materials prepares students for active and effective participation in the pluralistic, often contentious society which they will soon be adult members.”

I’m sure by now you are wondering about symbolic speech, which includes burning of flags and nonverbal ways of expression. According to the court, symbolic speech deserves First Amendment protection in some cases. One case was in the David O’ Brian case when the Supreme Court punished him for burning his draft card in violation of federal law. Many years later the Court reviewed a case where Gregory Lee Johnson had been convicted for burning the American flag during a protest at the Republican National Convention in Dallas. Come to find out, the government may not prohibit expression of an idea just because society finds it offensive.

Next, I will inform you on the incorporation doctrine. This applies the 14th Amendment’s due process clause to limit the power of state and local governments to abridge the guarantees of the Bill of Rights.

Do media incite harm? Working for the media has many positive and negatives to how people see you. It is known that if a member of the media is sued for causing physical harm, the plaintiff rarely wins. There is one well known case where this was not in our favor. Devin Thompson killed two police officers during his arrest for carjacking and he argued that his extensive play of two grand theft auto games caused post-traumatic stress and led to the killings. Although this isn’t directly with the media, it is a media company. This led people to worry about the rise of the well-known and used Pokemon Go game. Attorneys said the game could lure people into dangerous situations, and put warnings all throughout the web. Some trespassing lawsuits arose, but court records show no lawsuits brought against Take-Two, the game company, for personal injuries by the game.

Lastly, laws that target highly offensive speech are constitutional only if they are extremely narrowly tailored to address real and demonstrable harms. There has even been attempts to prohibit racial slander but this rarely is constitutional. This is, unless it becomes an actual threat. Overall, I hope this has given you more information on speech distinctions. I wanted to provide you with some real life examples to show you that this is important to understand because it is happening today. Please contact me with any further questions about the topic you may have.

Tess Leuck

Students Visit Blackhawk County Jail

On Tuesday, April 23, I got to visit and tour the Blackhawk County Jail along with my Journalism, Law, and Ethics class. I have always understood that a jail isn’t a pleasant place, but I had never been in one before, so this was a new experience for myself and many others. Of course I had seen what jail life is like from TV and movies, but I got a real feel for what it’s like from getting an actual tour from a sheriff.

Sheriff Tony Thompson greeted us as we got there and we had a question and answer session. He told us about himself, and gave a background on the jail as a whole. He is a very astute communicator and works with the media every week. We were told that the maximum most people stay in the jail is 2-3 years, and this is usually if they are waiting for a trial for a more serious case. He also spoke to us about being sued. If someone gets out of jail and is unhappy with how they were treated while incarcerated they can sue. He says most of these situations he wins, but there was one where he did not. If he is sued this affects his family as well. Being the Sheriff is a very demanding and important part of every county’s public safety.

We then received our tour from Blackhawk County Police officer. Before we entered the jail, he said if anyone makes sexual comments to any girls to let him know because it is not tolerated. This spiked a bit of nerves in me as we entered the jail. We got to see pretty must every part of the jail. One of the first places we toured was the holding cells where people that are arrested go to detox or go before they are booked. There were a few people in these. We also went into the garage where the police cars pull in with people they’ve arrested. The criminals enter through separate doors into an individual cell from the garage into the jail.

Next, we toured the room where the controls and camera security is. This job to me would get very tiring looking over these cameras for an entire shift. They basically said they look for anything people aren’t supposed to be doing. There are two or three people on duty at all times in this room. After this, we entered the library. This was a very small room, but inmates are able to check out books here. There is also a bible study held in the library weekly. If someone has not completed high school, they can also get part time schooling while in jail. This was very interesting to me.

The most thrilling part of the experience was seeing the pods with general population, and especially the maximum security area. We viewed the maximum security first from inside a room with glass windows that looked out to all the pods. I thought the windows were completely tinted and as an inmate came up to the window I looked straight at him, we made contact, and I then found out they aren’t completely tinted. I knew I was safe, but it still was a bit frightening for me. It was crazy standing in the room looking out knowing those people get only one hour out of their cell per day. Can you imagine?

The second most thrilling was seeing the general population room. Many (if not all) of the inmates were outside talking or showering when we entered. They all stared at us, but they knew better to do anything else. It was interesting to me to see that even to shower you hardly have privacy. The officer explained to us that not all of these people are bad people, some good people make bas mistakes but they have to pay for them. This made a lot of sense to me, and it was even sad to think that there may even be innocent people locked up.

There was absolutely nothing happy about the atmosphere of the jail. All of the walls were neutral colors and the most entertaining parts of the place were the library and a recreation room where inmates could play things such as basketball. How sad? Also remember nothing in jail is free. They are paying for food and to be there. There was by far more males than females, and we didn’t get to tour the pods of the women.

Another area of the jail we visited was the dispatch office. It was much bigger than I thought, with computer screens everywhere. This was in a separate area from the jail, and there was about 3 people working at 7 p.m. These people have a very important job and it was very quiet when we were in the room.

The last place we stopped was Sheriff Tony Thompson’s office. His office was very personal with photos of his family, trophies, and other things that are important to him. His desk was surrounded by papers, as he has a very important job. There were also desks of accountants next to his office and secretaries. This room is located near the door of where you walk into the jail.

Overall, this was an eye opening experience for me. The jail gave me many different emotions such as thrill, nerves, and excitement. It also in a way made me sad that these people are locked up with literally no access to the outside world. I can’t even imagine not being able to go outside for months or even years. My favorite part of the experience was seeing the max security just because it was thrilling and intense. The Blackhawk County Jail was able to give us a great opportunity and I am lucky to have been able to experience it.

4/16: Student Free Speech and Tinker v. Des Moines Anniversary

Student Free Speech and Tinker v. Des Moines Anniversary

John Tinker

February 2019

Marybeth Tinker & John Tinker

They wore black armbands to school to protest the vietnam war

• They were suspended
• They ended up suing
• Students had been given the right to wear freedom buttons due to the civil rights act

50 years later, why relevant today?

• “This is the first time the supreme court recognized that students in schools have their first amendment right”
• “This was a significant change as how students in public schools were seen.”

Parents were both active in civil rights movement

Lived in a small town in Iowa

• Only one black family, kids in that family were not permitted to use the public swimming pool.
• He was a pastor in the small town but after trying to do something about the family not being able to go to the pool his contract was not renewed.
• They then moved to des moines where he was at a church and they did not renew his contract there either due to him wanting to help black people
• “By the time the war in vietnam was building up, it was natural for us to be opposed to it.”
• “Black arm bands were worn during the civil rights era to memorialize the three girls who were killed in Birmingham”
• “It was very natural to wear black armbands to mourn the deaths in Vietnam”
• When school authorities found out they were going to wear armbands, they said they would not be allowed. They wore them anyways and then were suspended from school.

The suppression of student speech often happens because students speak out about issues the school is causing.

Place in California where students wanted to wear American Flag shirts on Cinco De Mayo. He doesn’t agree with this stance, but he does agree that they have the right to freedom of expression.

Tinkertourusa.org

Mary Beth Tinker

“I decided to go ahead and try to be brave like other kids I had seen on the news as examples.”

Her friends told her when she wore the arm band that she would get in trouble but she still wore it.

John Tinker

• “It’s important that students are taught the first amendment”

This is all about the first amendment

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District

November 12, 1968

It does not have to do with religion.

42 US code 1983

Court dismissed the petition to the circuit the decision was split 4 to 4

Met prior to the time in any of the armbands have been worn and enacted policy which was not written but which was agreed upon among themselves that no students would be allowed to wear the armbands

Christopher Eckhardt and Mary Beth Tinker wore them on the first day

The students mom was called and she said she supported him not wanting to remove the arm band

Mar Beth wore it throughout the entire morning without any incident related to anyway disrupting others.

Dan L. Johnson speaking on behalf of Tinker

“There should not be any special rules for freedom of expression in schools.”

“All we wanted to do was bury Matt with dignity and respect.”

The 2010 US Supreme Court case of Snyder v. Phelps was an extremely controversial one that had many people upset. For this specific case, the Snyder family filed a lawsuit against members of the Westboro Baptist church who picketed with provocative signs during their deceased Marine veteran son, Matthew Snyder.

These signs stated things such as “Thank god for dead soldiers”, “God hates your tears”, “Fag Troops” and many more. The followers of the church believe God punishes the US for its tolerance of homosexuality, especially in the military. This is their “purpose” for picketing. The Snyder family believes the church committed defamation, invasion of privacy, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress and the displaying of the signs.

For many including myself, this situation has me extremely angry that people can get away with being that disrespectful during a deceased troops funeral, and I completely understand the harm it has done to the family emotionally. But the real question is, were they protected by the first amendment? The first amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” According to Westboro Baptist Church members, they had every right to be there because of freedom of speech.

To me, technically they did have their “right” to be there in terms of the law. But, I don’t believe what they did was right or respectful in any means. As for what I believe the parameters of free speech should entail, I think this family should be protected and be able to bury their son and soldier in peace without people with signs stating “Thank god for dead soldiers” around. As the military is a part of the government, I think there ought to be some law or bill passed protecting the families involved with a deceased veteran. No matter if you like the military or not, publicly making a scene saying that person deserved to die is emotionally damaging and shouldn’t be covered by freedom of speech and the first amendment.

“There are other countries who won’t even let these people on their soil, and we let them get 500 feet from a soldiers funeral?” says Albert Snyder, Matthew’s father. “ Albert Snyder is very unhappy with the US government right now as he thinks soldiers who go and give their lives for us should be respected under law, and that our government failed to protect them. Margie Snyder, the leader of Westboro, has shown no remorse for picketing at the funeral. She is also the lawyer for the group, and happens to be very knowledgeable on the law and what is allowed for the group to do because of this.

The justices who voted 8-1 in support of free speech sid this had to do with the boundaries of the First Amendment, not what they think is ethically right. It is hard for me to agree with the fact that these people did not break any laws, which is why I believe there should be something out there to protect deceased soldiers.

Specifically, I think it should be prohibited to show disrespect near any funeral of a deceased veteran who died at war. The reasoning behind this is to protect the family and their emotions that could be damaged, and to pay respect for someone who gave their life to protect ours. This has nothing to do with the fact that a funeral is a religious event, it has to do with the fact of protecting military troops. Why die for this country to get disrespected like that? They should be nothing but honored. So that being said, I believe there should be some law that if someone chooses to picket in any way that harms the family or disrespects the veteran at an event (funeral) with a military member who died at war, the police should be able to issue a large ticket and also remove them from the situation. This way, freedom of speech is still honored, except for the situation of a military veterans funeral who died at war to give the family time to put their son, daughter, father, etc. to rest.

4/9: Snyder V. Phelps

Snyder vs. Phelps

Petitioner: Albert Snyder

Respondent: Fred W. Phelps, Sr.

2010

• The family of deceased Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder filed a lawsuit against members of the Westboro Baptist Church who picketed at his funeral. The family accused the church and its founders of defamation, invasion of privacy and the intentional infliction of emotional distress for displaying signs that said, “Thank God for dead soldiers” and “Fag troops” at Snyder’s funeral.
• Does the First Amendment protect protesters at a funeral from liability for intentionally inflicting emotional distress on the family of the deceased?

So you think theres no basis in the constitution to protect these protestors what so ever?

• “If our four fathers would have seen this we wouldn’t have even had to worry about this because they would be put in fire for treason” – his dad
• “There are other countries who won’t even let these people on their soil, and we let them get 500 feet from a soldiers funeral?”
• “It’s a slap in the face to our military men and women.”

They’re trying to get attention, what is your understanding? Why do they do this?

• “For the media, for the money.”
• “They’re not a church, they’re anything but a church”

They protest at really any high profile funeral

• “There’s not much we can do about it anymore when the government won’t do anything about it… when someone gets hurt let it be on the supreme court justices hands.”
• “Along with the rice comes responsibility, and noone has done this before this group”

Remembering his son

• He was proud to be a soldier
• “If he could see this I don’t think he would be very proud of this country right now.” – Albert Snyder

“At this time I get along with me life, I’m tired, and I’m ready to get this over with.”

Were you surprised by this decision?

Ask yourself as a reporter:

What is the story, who is the story, are you going to ignore the protestors, and if that’s what you decide are you really truthful on what is going on, if you make the protestors the story have you hijacked the story away from the soldier who died?

• Are you being truthful to your audiences

Most are from one family

Marge Phelps – LEADER

They don’t care about the pain they cause.

“All we wanted to do was bury Matt with dignity and respect.” – Albert Snyder

13 total kids, but 9 are involved in the church.

Nobody going into the funeral heard or saw westboro picketers, when the funeral started they left.

• “If we had walked into the church with our picket signs, liability may be different.” – marge
• The snyder family did not ask for the westboro church to the funeral
  • He was just trying to put himself to rest
  • You cannot redo a burial or funeral ceremony. This is a case of exploiting a private families grief.
• He brought it into the media by his anger with his sons death – therefore marge says he can’t put that out in the media and expect people not to respond

People called in and were able to ask the lawyers questions

Marge says the priest that was there at the funeral testified saying that he did not hear westboro

The court upheld their right no matter how terrible it was

Riding With Officer Lechtenberg

On Monday, April 8 at 9:00 a.m., I got to ride along with patrol officer Austin Lechtenberg. Officer Lechtenberg attended Wartburg College and also played baseball there. After graduation, he took a job offer as a police officer in Indianola, Iowa. He worked there for about a year, and then moved to Cedar Falls to follow his fiance. Before we got in the vehicle, he gave me a tour of the police department and I also saw a police officer I recognized while walking through.

Being a young officer, I was able to relate with him well and have good conversation. After talking for a while, I found out he was friends with and played baseball in college with one of my old high school friends.

As we began the drive, he explained to me that there are 3 areas police cover in Cedar Falls. We covered area 3, which is everything south of 12th Street and east of main. He showed me the other two areas on his computer. One of the first things I asked him about was theft from retail stores. Working at Old Navy, I have seen this happen first hand, and I wanted to hear more about it. He told me some of the most common places they get video coverage from are Walmart, Kohls, Scheels, and Old Navy. Officer Lechtenberg explained to me that what happens most the time when they arrest someone for theft is that they will have a $200 bond so they’ll bond out right away.

Officer Lechtenberg currently works 1st shift, but prefers 3rd because he thinks they’re more fun and there is less traffic. There are 9 other officers that work 1st shift as well, and this stays the same year round. I was very curious about the college and party scene and how this affects the Cedar Falls Department. I asked him how they deal with this and under what circumstances do they charge people. He said, “We only charge people if it’s their second offense.” Their job is to keep people safe and usually they just shut down parties, and if anyone is charged it would be the people living at the residence. They are also told not to run after people at college parties, but he said sometimes he wishes they could. Third shift is also the busiest shift, which is also during bar close.

The next topic I brought up was speeding. He told me the most common streets for speeding are South Main and Hudson that he’s noticed. This doesn’t surprise me at all as I’ve probably sped on those streets as well. He told me his main goal isn’t to sit in one spot and hand out speeding tickets every day. He said, “I like to drive around and look for stuff, I don’t like sitting as much.” To me, this seemed like something a good police officer would do. I don’t necessarily agree with just trying to give out as many speeding tickets as you can. Officer Lechtenburg said usually he only makes a traffic stop for speeding if that person is going over ten over. He stated, “I’ll usually knock the ticket down to 5 or 10 under what they were going if I issue a ticket.”

I asked Officer Lechtenberg what the most dangerous situation is that he has been with, because who wouldn’t want to know? As he is a newer cop, he said he hasn’t seen anything too crazy, but when he was working in Indianola he had a situation where a girl had a gun to her boyfriend. She fired the gun but it didn’t hit him. This happened when he was on the job for just 6 months, so this situation was memorable to him. He also went into detail about a shooting on the hill that happened within the past year. He wasn’t involved, but it was a big deal for them to deal with. The shooter shot 10 rounds, with one going through the window of Octopus. They never ended up finding the person who did this and nobody would speak up on the situation, so they believe it was gang related.

Around 9:40 we made a traffic stop and pulled over a man for speeding. He was going 48 in a 35 and was given a verbal warning. He was actually driving a company vehicle and also didn’t have his license on him. Officer Lechtenberg came back to the squad car and looked him up by name and birth date and showed me how it was done. I was able to capture video of this stop.

The next topic I brought up was racial profiling. This topic is huge right now, and especially with police. I asked him if he has ever been accused of racial profiling. He responded, “I haven’t personally, but one of our African American officers arrested a Hispanic guy, and he said he was profiling him.” This hasn’t been a prominent issue that Officer Lechtenberg is aware of, but it definitely does happen whether the officer actually makes a decision based on race or not.

Officer Lechtenberg told me he was happy and excited that Cedar Falls will have a new station at Main Street and Greenhill. This will be a great addition for them as they are currently in the city hall basement and as he said, is in older shape.

As weather can get bad in the cold Iowa winters, I have always wondered what police officers do when roads aren’t drivable and they are on duty. This winter we had many storms like this. He said they still are out driving, unless it gets so bad where you can’t drive, then they go back to the station. He explained the importance of them being out in bad weather as there are many more accidents at these times.

On our drive back to the station, I asked about drugs. To me, Cedar Falls seemed like a safer town, and you don’t hear about a lot of drug busts. He responded, “We do have them but not as much when I was in Indianola. But, just because they aren’t as prominent here doesn’t mean they aren’t still floating around. They definitely are.” He said there was a big meth issue in Indianola, which he hasn’t ran into as much in the Cedar Falls area.

Lastly, when we got back to the city hall he gave me a full tour of his patrol vehicle. The officers in Cedar Falls all become trained in fire, so there is equipment for that in the back. The seats in the back of the car are hard plastic and the back seat is very small. I found this out while sitting in the back of a cop car when my friend once got in an accident. I got to see the spotlight and also sit in the drivers seat of the car.

Overall, this experience was great. It was much different being in the car from that point of view from being a regular driver on the street. Many times when a car would slow way down in front of him he would make a comment about how people always do that, but when I thought about it I do the same. It made me remember that cops aren’t bad guys, they don’t drive around trying to get you in trouble, they are out there to keep you safe. Officer Lechtenberg was a great officer to ride along with and I had a good experience. The ride ended around 10:10 a.m.

4/2: RBG Movie

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

• Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Ginsburg was appointed by President Bill Clinton and took the oath of office on August 10, 1993. She is the second female justice of four to be confirmed to the court.
• Neither of her parents went to college so she was a first generation, but they taught her that education was very important
• Growing up, she liked to do the things boys liked to do such as climb on garage roofs
• Her mother died when she was 17. She always said to do two things always:
  • Be a lady
  • be independent
• “I became a lawyer in the days that women were not wanted in most men in the law profession”
• She went to cornell
• “My first semester at cornell, I never did a repeat date.”
• “He was the first boy I ever knew that cared that I had a brain” — talking about marty
• “Meeting marty was by far the most fortunate things to ever happen to me”
• Women did not come into the Harvard law school until the 50’s.. And even then it was only about 2%
  • Ruth said she felt uncomfortable to say anything in class
• She was once told she couldn’t enter a room at Harvard because she was female
• “I came to harvard as the mother of a 14 month old child”
  • “Playing with my daughter gave me a rest from the kind of work I was doing in law school and I think it made me more sane.”
• During law school (marty’s third year) marty had ovarian cancer
• Her son and daughter said he remembered her working till 3, 4 or 5 in the morning, show up to court at 9 and go on with her day. She would sleep all weekend to make up for it.
• Marty graduated from Harvard and this is when Ruth was in her second year of law school
• Ruth graduated from law school at Columbia in 1959
  • Had to transfer to be with Marty
  • No firm in NYC would hire her because she was a woman
• “Being a woman was an impediment” – Ruth
• There were thousands of state and federal laws that discriminated against gender
• Employers in most states were able to legally fire a woman for being pregnant
• Marching and protesting wasn’t her thing, she wanted to put her knowledge and law skills to work
• She began working with women’s rights movements
• First Case was with a girl who was in the air force
  • She was being treated unfairly
  • Lost in the district court, so went to the supreme court
  • The justices weren’t expecting to have to deal with her power and stature.
  • They won this case
• She loves going to oprah
• Gender based discrimination hurts everyone – ruth says
• She used each case to move things forward in women’s rights, it was like “knitting a sweater”
• She says she saw herself as a Kindergarten teacher because those judges did not think gender discrimination was a thing
  • She told them to think of women as all their daughters and granddaughters
• She won ⅚ cases
• He moved to Washington to be with Ruth, which was pretty much unheard of during this time
• Marty helped temper Ruth’s seriousness – says their son
• He allowed ruth to be who she was
• Ruth was a terrible cook
• Marty helped Ruth and respected her so much. He wanted her to be seriously considered for court.
• Bill Clinton nominated Ruth to be a Justice in the Supreme Court
• She was confirmed 96-3

She wanted to be able to convince her fellow justices to move her way even if it meant compromising a little.

You start with an assumption that you have got to treat both genders equally.

Lilly Ledbetter

• Obama signed this bill
• The Lilly Ledbetter fair pay act

Marty became weaker and weaker

• She somehow knew how to keep herself together in public
• 1932-2010 (marty)

She got cancer

• It made her enjoy the things of everyday life more
• When she came out of chemotherapy she began working out

She has become more public and more vocal

Ruth made rude comments about Trump

• She issued an apology

Many wanted her to step down so Obama could elect a different judge. She was asked if she regretted not stepping down and she said that she will do the job until she can’t do it to her best effort anymore.

She changed the way the world is for american women.