Pro-Palestinian protesters sue University of Iowa police for no-trespass orders

IOWA CITY — A group of pro-Palestinian protesters removed from University of Iowa property earlier this month while setting up a prohibited encampment are asking a court to intervene and declare them constitutionally entitled to assemble and voice their demands and grievances on UI grounds.

“Plaintiffs have been damaged by defendants’ actions in banning them from future demonstrations and expressive activities on property managed by the University of Iowa,” according to a lawsuit filed this week by a group of 13 protesters — including six UI students and three UI employees. “Plaintiffs’ participation in First Amendment activity has been chilled by the no-trespass notice.”

The lawsuit — filed against the state’s eight active regents, the university, its police department, UI police detective Brett Cooper, and UI Chief of Police Lucy Wiederholt — stems from an encampment the group began setting up early May 6.

Echoing sentiments being expressed across colleges and universities nationally — advocating for a “free, liberated Palestine” — the group erected a camp site in Hubbard Park, on UI property just south of the Iowa Memorial Union.

Almost immediately, per UI policy barring camping and encampments on its grounds, UI police told protesters to disassemble their site. UI officials — in the days prior, with other peaceful protests unfolding on the UI campus and nationally — had shared publicly their policies barring camping and encampments.

So when officers told the May 6 protesters to pack it up, they complied and left the park, according to their lawsuit.

In the days that followed, detective Cooper reached back out to each involved protester and advised them they were being given no-trespass orders barring them — for six months — from being on any UI “outdoor spaces unless simply traversing the property,” according to the lawsuit.

Violators, per the notices, could be arrested and face criminal trespassing charges.

“(The protesters) were given no prior notice or opportunity to be heard to contest the bans,” according to their lawsuit. “If the University of Iowa Police Department undertook any fact-finding processes prior to banning (protesters) from university property, they did so in secret without notice to the (protesters) or any opportunity for (protesters) to be heard.”

In their lawsuit, the protesters said they received no information on how to appeal the orders and haven’t had anyone respond to their questions.

“The no-trespass notices have the effect of prohibiting (protesters) from entering any public forum managed by the University of Iowa and engaging in expressive activity,” according to the lawsuit. “The no-trespass notices also have the effect of deterring (protesters) from using Board of Regents property for their schooling and employment.”

UI police didn’t immediately respond to The Gazette’s questions about whether they’re required to give prior notice before issuing no-trespass orders; whether they must give the subjects of their orders notice about fact-finding in their cases; and whether subjects must be allowed to “be heard” on the prohibitions.

State law defines trespassing as, among other things, entering or staying on a property "after being notified or requested to abstain from entering.“

“A person has been notified or requested to abstain from entering or remaining upon or in property … if any of the following is applicable,” according to Iowa Code. “The person has been notified to abstain from entering or remaining upon or in property personally, either orally or in writing, including by a valid court order.”

In their lawsuit, the protesters cite case law arguing, “Restrictions on speech in a traditionally public forum must burden no more speech than necessary to serve a significant government interest.”

And they characterize the no-trespass orders precluding them from UI open spaces — unless simply crossing the grounds — as “overbroad and an illegal infringement of plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights.”

“Plaintiffs are being caused irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law,” according to their lawsuit, which does list several court demands — including an injunction against the UI’s no-trespass order.

“Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable injury under the real and immediate threat of continued prosecution for exercising their constitutional rights,” according to the lawsuit. “Plaintiffs are refraining from constitutionally protected activities solely out of fear of arrest, citation, and/or prosecution if they continue to exercise their rights.”

The protesters also have asked for compensation for “mental anguish and humiliation,” attorney fees, pre-judgment interest, and a punitive award.

“The no-trespass orders are not reasonable restrictions on the time, place, or manner of plaintiffs’ speech, nor are they narrowly tailored,” according to the lawsuit. “Defendants demonstrated a deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard of plaintiffs’ civil and constitutional rights.”

  Buy Photo

Vanessa Miller covers higher education for The Gazette.

Comments: (319) 339-3158; vanessa.miller@thegazette.com