Judge rules Ohio official’s rights violated during arrest at public meeting
Media Landscape
See who else is reporting on this story and which side of the political spectrum they lean. To read other sources, click on the plus signs below. Learn more about this data[LAUREN TAYLOR]
AN ELECTED OHIO OFFICIAL HANDCUFFED AND TAKEN INTO CUSTODY DURING AN OFFICIAL PROCEEDING–
THE INCIDENT LIVE-STREAMED ON FACEBOOK.
NOW, A FEDERAL JUDGE RULING THAT HER FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED, SAYING THE “SPEECH CAUSED HER ARREST.”
IT’S THE DECISION NIKI FRENCHKO, THE LONE AND FIRST REPUBLICAN TO BE ELECTED TO THE TRUMBULL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS IN NEARLY THREE DECADES, HAD BEEN LONG-AWAITING– SINCE THE ORDEAL HAPPENED IN JULY OF 2022.
[NIKI FRENCHKO]
“The reason why I filed this case was not just for me. I felt compelled to make sure that I filed something because the government officials don’t have the ability to treat someone as they did to me.”
[LAUREN TAYLOR]
POLICE TOOK FRENCHKO INTO CUSTODY AFTER FELLOW COMMISSIONERS CALLED FOR HER ARREST DURING A MEETING– FOLLOWING HER CRITICISM OF THE COUNTY SHERIFF FOR HIS HANDLING OF AN INMATE DEATH.
TWO COMMISSIONERS REPORTEDLY TOLD FRENCHKO TO STOP WITH THE CRITIQUE– AND TO HAVE THE MEETING MOVE FORWARD.
FRENCHKO DID NOT.
THAT’S WHEN TWO DEPUTIES COMPLIED WITH THE ORDER– TAKING HER OUTSIDE THE ROOM AND PLACING HER IN HANDCUFFS.–
CHARGING THE REPUBLICAN WITH A STATE MISDEMEANOR TO “PREVENT OR DISRUPT A LAWFUL MEETING.”
POLICE DROPPED THE CHARGE WEEKS LATER.
BUT FRENCHKO PRESSED ON IN HER LEGAL FIGHT.
IN FACT, THE FORMER DEMOCRATIC CHAIRMAN OF THE NEIGHBORING COUNTY REPRESENTED HER IN COURT, ARGUING THE CASE IS BIGGER THAN POLITICS SAYING:
“WE CAN’T ARREST EACH OTHER BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE WITH THEM POLITICALLY. ONCE YOU START DOWN THAT SLOPE, IT’S BAD NEWS FOR ALL OF US.”
DURING THE CIVIL CASE, THE JUDGE DECLARED THE SHERIFF, THE DEPUTIES WHO ARRESTED HER AND BOTH OF FRENCHKO’S COLLEAGUES PERSONALLY LIABLE FOR DAMAGES.
A HEARING ON DAMAGES WILL BE SCHEDULED LATER.
THE SHERIFF AND ONE OF THE NOW-RETIRED COMMISSIONERS DID NOT RESPOND TO A REQUEST FOR COMMENT.
THIS WEEK’S RULING SAID THE DEFENDANTS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO IMMUNITY FROM DAMAGES BECAUSE THE LAW HAS “LONG RECOGNIZED THAT ANY REASONABLE OFFICIAL WOULD KNOW THAT THE FIRST AMENDMENT DOES NOT COUNTENANCE THE ARREST OF A PERSON FOR ENGAGING IN PROTECTED SPEECH.”
AN APPEAL OF THE JUDGMENT IS REPORTEDLY EXPECTED.