(Image: CHS)
There were few signs of change at the Occupy Seattle camp Monday morning on Seattle Central’s campus following last week’s vote by community college trustees to invoke an emergency rule banning the camp from school property.
A lawyer representing Occupy Seattle filed a lawsuit to block the emergency rule on grounds the camping ban violates First Amendment-protected speech.
A Thurston County Superior Court hearing on the suit is scheduled for this Friday afternoon.
Occupy reps have said state and school officials told the group no action will be taken against the banned camp unti the results of Friday’s hearing are known.
SCCC president Dr. Paul Killpatrick told CHS he expects to work with campers for a peaceful eviction in coming weeks, not months.
In the meantime, some of the SCCC campers have traveled to Olympia this week for Occupy the Capitol efforts during the week’s special legislative session. Others affiliated with Occupy Seattle continue their takeover of an empty home at 23rd and Alder in the Central District. At Occupy’s Sunday night general assembly, the group voted to take part in this week’s planned West Coast port protests.
Monday morning, dozens of tents were still in place and campers were setting about tidying up and getting about their morning business as a TV news van set up on Broadway nearby. One barefoot man slept under a blanket in front of the row of chemical toilets. Another man moved a load of trash from an overflowing campus garbage can to a less-overflowing can.
Maybe not. In LA and Philadelphia today, Occupy encampments defied eviction deadlines as officials backed away from plans to eject the tent cities. The authorities seem to be learning that heavy handed assaults on Occupy reliably backfire.
In this case I don’t think it would… Though my take is that Occupy Seattle may finally take its place as Occupy Olympia.
Just saw an update that they’re now occupying the Washington state capitol building to demand no budget cuts and that the rich pay their share. Excellent.
@Alan – That would make sense, which is clearly the opposite of OS’ current plan which is to squat on a community college campus and cause a scene in front of a BOA branch.
The Occupy tactics of “squatting and causing scenes” have scored an impressive early victory by catapulting stories on income inequality and corporate tax evasion to the top of the mainstream news, which had largely ignored those issues before. Not bad for a two month old movement.
Time has moved forward. There is no going back to pre-Occupy days.
Does OS have a licensed attorney on this case? Patricia Sully’s name does not come up on the WSBA lawyer directory, which tells us that she is not a lawyer – at least not one licensed to practice in Washington state. The judge could hold that, while Ms. Sully can indeed represent herself as a Pro Se litigant, she cannot legally represent the “unincorporated association” identified in the complaint as Occupy Seattle. It will be interesting to see how this plays out on Friday.
I’m sure the clerk can clarify with Ms. Sully by calling the OS phone number listed on the complaint, which rings the SCCC operator.
“Time has moved forward. There is no going back to pre-Occupy days. “
I think occupy is taking itself a little more hyperbolically than everyone else is. Points for drama, though.
1) Why is the case being heard in Thurston County Superior Court instead of King County? Perhaps a more liberal judge? Doesn’t a case have to be filed in the county where the problem is occurring?
2) Why is the SPD tolerating the taking over/squatting of the house in the CD? Isn’t that illegal?
1. An action against the state may be brought in the county where the plaintiff resides or in Thurston county, where the state capitol is.
2. I assume it’s illegal, but maybe the actual property owner has to take action here. Not sure SPD has authority to act on its own. There’s definitely a large grey area on this one, so I just don’t know for sure. I certainly think taking over the house is presumptuous and smacks of entitlement, much like setting up a resident camp and using a huge amount of the “99%’s” tax dollars to supposedly advocate on behalf of the “99%”, whatever “99%” means.
A squatter is only trespassing if the property owner enforces their property rights. This can be as simple as a no trespassing sign, which I’m surprised isn’t already there. No grey area at all, the owner (or their representative) just needs to be the one that complains.
OPEN CALL – Have A Voice (The peoples Lobby)
They are not going to listen to you, and they are not going to listen to me, but they will here us.
Have A Voice – January 20th, 2012 at the Seattle Federal Courthouse at 700 Stewart Street.
If you are a speaker or entertainer or person who needs to say something, please be there, and have your voice!
December 10th, 2011 organizing and planning meeting in Seattle at the Capital Hill library Branch at 425 Harvard Ave. E., at 2:00pm. Plan is to educate and inform people (and myself) as to the changes we could and need to make about money in politics, and how to do it. My goal is lobbying reform, election reform, and corporate law reform. I would like to try and stay focused on the money. I feel the root of a citizens lack of voice in our political process, and legislation, is the money.
I feel if lobbying was a public open forum; and treated like the judiciary – where conflicts of interest are against the law; that would stop insider lobbying deals. I feel if elections could only be funded by small donations from citizens, this would clean up election money. I feel capitalism in this country has been bastardized with “too big to fail”, and the Citizens United Supreme Court decision allowing corporate money the same “respect” as an individual citizens vote. I vote to amend, and fix this axis of evil.
I am fighting the new “Axis of Evil”; Lobbying; Elections; and Corporate money. !
My goal in Seattle is three resolutions; One revoking the Citizens United Supreme Court decision. One making lobbying a public forum treated like the judiciary where conflicts of interest are against the law. One that states only a human citizen can donate a maximum of $200.00 to any political candidates election.
Lofty goals yes, can’t help myself. We will need at least four different working groups, to make Occupy the Courts on January 20th, 2012 – a complete success (for me) in Seattle! What’s your idea?
Please help me!
Thanks and Speak up, create your voice.
Kenn
January 20, 2012 – Move to Amend Occupies the Courts!
Move To Amend is planning bold action to mark this date — Occupy the Courts — a one day occupation on Friday January 20, 2012, of the Federal Courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States and as many of the 89 U.S. District Court Buildings as we can. (I am inspired by Doctor Martin Luther King who said; “a true revolution of values”, … “there comes a time when silence is betrayal”., “people are not gonna be silenced”.). Move to Amend will lead the charge on the judiciary which created — and continues to expand — corporate personhood rights.
Please Sign the petition to amend the Constitution for revoking corporate personhood at:
movetoamend.org
It’s Time to GET MONEY OUT of politics
Bailouts. War. Unemployment. Our government is bought, and we’re angry. Now, we’re turning our anger into positive action. By signing this petition, you are joining our campaign to get money out of politics. Our politicians won’t do this. But we will. We will become an unrelenting, massive organized wave advocating a Constitutional amendment to get money out of politics.
Please sign the petition!
http://www.getmoneyout.com/
http://open.salon.com/blog/kennspace/2011/10/28/corporate_oc
I agree with your thoughts on getting money out of politics and passing legislation which would negate “Citizen’s United.”
But, mostly, I commend you for taking responsible action on what you passionately believe. What a contrast to the activities of the OS movement, which are ineffective and useless!
Definitely agree on the Citizens United issue and on limiting campaign contributions. We should just move to publically funded campaigns. Citizens United is likely the worst decision in recent years.
Man, “publicly,” not “publically.” I can’t spell today.
Neighbor,
What statute or case holds that a person only commits trespass if a property owner chooses to enforce his/her rights? The trespass statutes address whether someone knowingly enters or remains in a building without lawful permission. They do not state that a person only commits trespass if an owner complains or puts up a no trespassing sign. A defense to trespass is abandonment, but it does not appear sufficiently applicable in this case.
My comment on the grey area was to state that I’m not aware of whether police have authority to act on it or whether the property owner must fist act. I have not found anything in the law, including a brief review of case law connected to the criminal trespass statutes, that precludes the police from enforcing a trespass statute on their own. Certainly, there is nothing that states it isn’t a violation of law unless the property owner actually complains.
If you have case law to support your position, please copy it. Otherwise, the issue is not nearly as clear simple as you suggest.