Southern California High School Sued for Silencing Student on Issue of
Illegal Immigration

To: National Desk

Contact: Richard D. Ackerman, Esq., Lively, Ackerman & Cowles,
951-308-6454, 951-258-5456 cell

RIVERSIDE, Calif., June 2 /Christian Newswire
<http://www.christiannewswire.org>/ -- The public interest firm of
Lively, Ackerman & Cowles <http://www.livelyackerman.com/> filed suit on
behalf of Jurupa Valley High School student Joshua Denhalter on Thursday
afternoon. The First Amendment suit alleges that the public high school
has intentionally interfered with his right to speak out on the issue of
illegal immigration.

Mr. Denhalter alleges that on March 27, 2006, dozens of high school
students, mostly of Mexican-American descent, illegally walked out of
school in protest of legislation (HR4437) that was being proposed by the
U.S. Congress concerning illegal immigration. He was not one of these
students and chose to act lawfully.

Instead of illegally walking out of school and being truant, Denhalter
chose to organize a legitimate and lawful counter-protest/assembly
during the lunch hour on or about March 30, 2006. The peaceable assembly
was to take place across from the school on a public sidewalk (i.e., a
traditional public forum).

The peaceable assembly would not have disrupted school activities
because Jurupa Valley High School has an “open lunch” period. This means
that students are free to come and go during this time. As such, any
student could have “walked out” during the lunch to attend the assembly
and there would be no disruption or violation of truancy laws.

On the morning of March 30, 2006, Denhalter began handing out flyers for
his event. That same morning, around 7:30 AM, he was approached by
school officials and told that he could not hand out flyers advertising
his First Amendment protected activities. He refused to give up his
right to pass out handbills/flyers. As a result of his refusal to give
up his constitutional rights, Denhalter was suspended for “handing out
flyers (before school) advocating the disruption of school activities”.
However, the school did not punish the dozens of students who walked out
in violation of the law several days before.

Furthermore, between March 27 and March 30, 2006, the school allowed
MECHA to sponsor an on-campus rally in opposition to HR4437. Denhalter
asked for permission to sponsor a similar counter-rally on campus but
was flatly denied by the school district's board.

Finally, just the week before filing of this complaint, on May 25, 2006,
the school prohibited Denhalter from wearing a “Save Our State
<http://www.saveourstate.org/>” t-shirt by telling him that he needed to
turn the shirt inside out and not ever wear it again. The content of the
political speech set forth on the shirt was the sole basis for this
censorship and prior restraint of Denhalter’s rights. He seeks a
restraining order allowing him to express himself freely as to political
matters until the end of the school year (i.e., June 21, 2006).

According to lead attorney Richard D. Ackerman, “This is one of the
worst governmental censorship cases I have seen in over a decade of
practice. It is simply unbelievable that a school district would take
sides with those who promote illegal activity over a student wishing to
express his protected views in a traditionally and legally acceptable
manner. These officials must be severely punished for their actions.”
The law firm is handling this matter on a pro bono basis. The firm says
that temporary restraining orders will be sought against the school
within the next ten days.

Donations are being taken for Denhalter's legal costs through the
donation link at www.profamilylawcenter.com
<http://www.profamilylawcenter.com/>. Those interested in helping this
young man can designate the money to be used for the "Josh Denhalter
First Amendment Fund." Tax deductible donations will only be used to
assist in his and related First Amendment cases. Mr. Denhalter is going
to boot camp five days after graduating from Jurupa Valley High School
and cannot afford the costs of this litigation.