Monday, October 30, 2006
Public Citizen, the national organization founded by Ralph Nader to fight for openness and democratic accountability in government, has filed a Friend of the Court Brief calling upon the Massachusetts courts to dismiss the lawsuit brought by the Islamic Society of Boston ("ISB") against various non-profit organizations and private citizens who called for government review of the Boston Redevelopment Authority's controversial land deal with the ISB. Along with numerous citizens, organizations and public officials, The David Project called for review of the land deal in 2004 after public reports disclosed evidence that various past and present ISB leaders had defended and supported acts of violence against Jews, Americans and others, and that the key BRA official managing the transaction was simultaneously a fundraiser for the ISB at the same time that he was on the BRA payroll.
In a brief filed with the Massachusetts Appeals Court earlier this week, Public Citizen, a non-profit organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. with approximately 100,000 members across the United States, urged that the ISB lawsuit be dismissed at a preliminary stage under the Massachusetts Anti-SLAPP statute, a statute enacted by the Massachusetts Legislature to stop lawsuits aimed at intimidating citizens and chilling the exercise of their First Amendment rights. Public Citizen, founded by Ralph Nader in 1971, stated that prior to the statute's enactment, "concerned individuals and groups could be intimidated by the risk that, as a direct result of their petitioning activity, they would be forced to defend protracted and expensive litigation. An anti-SLAPP statute is intended not only to prevent the chilling effects SLAPP suits have on an individual's right to petition the government, but to further the operation of representative government itself."
The organization urged that the ISB lawsuit against The David Project and other citizens be dismissed at the threshold, under a statutory provision which entitles defendants who win dismissal of the case to an award of their attorney's fees.
H/T to Tom Glennon who asks rhetorically: "I rarely agree with Ralph Nader, but at least he understands the concept of free speech. I wonder where the ACLU has been?"
Where has the ACLU been? Not interested.
Sometimes Ralph Nader is downright brilliant--as he is here in this situation. Other times, he is, well, stupid, uninformed, infuriating. sigh.