A major Prolife victory happened on July 12, 2019 when the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals overturned Ellen Hermann‘s conviction of handing out pamphlets without a permit. This is significant because over the years, the city of Tuscaloosa has been known to turned a blind eye to Prolife advocates concerns and sometimes even tried to silence their First Amendment Rights. This time, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals basically said; No Tuscaloosa, you cannot punish someone when they have not broken the law.
The timeline:
May 1, 2017– Tuscaloosa Prolife Advocate Ellen Hermann was ticketed for distributing pamphlets without a permit while on the public right-of-way at the entrance to the office complex where West Alabama Women’s Center (Tuscaloosa’s abortion business) is located.
August 8, 2017–Hermann was found guilty by the Tuscaloosa Municipal Court. In court, Hermann‘s lawyers argued that Tuscaloosa’s code was unconstitutional (due to her First Amendment rights) and in addition, she was wrongly ticketed because she did not violate this code. Hermann appealed to the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court.
July 19,2018– In the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court, Hermann‘s evidence was presented and Hermann was once again found guilty. Hermann then filed an appeal to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.
July 12, 2019– After reviewing Hermann‘s case, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals released a REVERSAL of Hermann‘s guilty verdict by the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court.
“…the city’s prosecution of Hermann’s distribution of pamphlets on the basis that she failed to obtain a permit is unjustifiable; the city cannot prosecute Hermann for violating the permit requirement … when the very ordinance that provides the permitting process expressly states that Hermann’s conduct did not require a permit,” wrote Judge Chris McCool in an opinion that the other four justices on the court agreed with. “The city cannot punish Hermann for failing to obtain a permit for conduct the city has expressly provided does not require a permit. Accordingly, under the specific facts of this case, we reverse Hermann’s conviction and render a judgment in her favor.”
It’s important to vote in judges of integrity that will uphold the law, as evidenced in this case.
A major Prolife victory happened on July 12, 2019 when the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals overturned Ellen Hermann‘s conviction of handing out pamphlets without a permit. This is significant because over the years, the city of Tuscaloosa has been known to turned a blind eye to Prolife advocates concerns and sometimes even tried to silence their First Amendment Rights. This time, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals basically said; No Tuscaloosa, you cannot punish someone when they have not broken the law.
The timeline:
May 1, 2017– Tuscaloosa Prolife Advocate Ellen Hermann was ticketed for distributing pamphlets without a permit while on the public right-of-way at the entrance to the office complex where West Alabama Women’s Center (Tuscaloosa’s abortion business) is located.
August 8, 2017–Hermann was found guilty by the Tuscaloosa Municipal Court. In court, Hermann‘s lawyers argued that Tuscaloosa’s code was unconstitutional (due to her First Amendment rights) and in addition, she was wrongly ticketed because she did not violate this code. Hermann appealed to the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court.
July 19,2018– In the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court, Hermann‘s evidence was presented and Hermann was once again found guilty. Hermann then filed an appeal to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.
July 12, 2019– After reviewing Hermann‘s case, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals released a REVERSAL of Hermann‘s guilty verdict by the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court.
“…the city’s prosecution of Hermann’s distribution of pamphlets on the basis that she failed to obtain a permit is unjustifiable; the city cannot prosecute Hermann for violating the permit requirement … when the very ordinance that provides the permitting process expressly states that Hermann’s conduct did not require a permit,” wrote Judge Chris McCool in an opinion that the other four justices on the court agreed with. “The city cannot punish Hermann for failing to obtain a permit for conduct the city has expressly provided does not require a permit. Accordingly, under the specific facts of this case, we reverse Hermann’s conviction and render a judgment in her favor.”
It’s important to vote in judges of integrity that will uphold the law, as evidenced in this case.