On The Front Lines

Everyday The Rutherford Institute is waging a battle to protect the human rights and civil liberties of all people. Whether challenging undue government suppression of civil liberties in the courts or calling upon political leaders to strengthen their commitment to universal moral values, The Rutherford Institute works tirelessly to maintain the rights enshrined in the Constitution, and regain those that have been lost to government intrusion.

On the Front Lines (Rutherford Press Alerts) will keep you abreast of the most recent actions The Rutherford Institute has undertaken in its fight for human rights and civil liberties. From pending litigation to victories for human rights and civil liberties, On the Front Lines is the place to find information on the most pressing issues of the day. The Rutherford Institute is waging for our rights in the courts and beyond. On The Front Lines will keep you up-to-date on the crucial battles

Recent Articles

April 18, 2019

Under Texas Law Banning Annoying or Offensive Electronic Messages, Man Faces a Year in Prison for Criticizing Police

Warning that the government must not be given the power to criminalize speech it deems distasteful or annoying, The Rutherford Institute has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the prosecution of a Texas man who faces up to one year in jail and a $4000 fine for sending emails to police criticizing them for failing to respond to his requests for assistance. In an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court, Rutherford Institute attorneys argue that the prosecution of Scott Ogle for sending complaints to a sheriff’s office, including one email stating that officials were “pissing” on the Constitution, violates the First Amendment’s safeguards for freedom of speech and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Moreover, Institute attorneys argue that the Texas law under which Ogle was charged, which makes it a crime to send “annoying,” “alarming” or “harassing” electronic messages, is so overbroad that it could be used to punish a negative review of a restaurant posted online or caustic Facebook posts.

April 12, 2019

Overkill: Gov’t Officials Deploy 700 Police, Spend $3 Million to Lockdown City Only to Arrest Disabled Veteran for Buying Canned Iced Tea, Bug Spray

Denouncing a Virginia town’s draconian lockdown measures as a clear example of a dysfunctional, excessive government that overreaches, overspends, and is out of sync with the Constitution, The Rutherford Institute has asked a federal court to hold government officials responsible for adopting costly security protocols lacking in common sense and intended to chill First Amendment activity. The Rutherford Institute’s actions come in response to a motion filed by the City of Charlottesville to dismiss Miska v. Charlottesville, a Fourth Amendment lawsuit against the City over its August 2018 “state of emergency” lockdown measures. The lawsuit arose after police swarmed a disabled war veteran and arrested him for lawfully purchasing canned iced tea, bug spray, lightbulbs and razor blades, which were banned as part of the city’s pre-emptive measures to discourage civil unrest, all the while allowing him to carry two firearms—which were not among the city’s prohibited items—through a security checkpoint.