Case No. 02-1326 ______________________________________________________________________________ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT ______________________________________________________________________________ KENNETH C. ROSSIGNOL, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants v. RICHARD VOORHAAR, et al., Defendants-Appellees. ______________________________________________________________________________ On Appeal From the United States District Court for the District of Maryland Case No. WMN-99-CV-3302 The Honorable William M. Nickerson ______________________________________________________________________________ BRIEF AMICI CURIAE OF REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEWSPAPER EDITORS, ASSOCIATION OF ALTERNATIVE NEWSWEEKLIES, MARYLAND-DELAWARE-DC PRESS ASSOCIATION, AND MARYLAND MEDIA IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANTS AND REVERSAL OF THE DISTRICT COURT ______________________________________________________________________________ Lucy A. Dalglish Paul M. Smith Gregg P. Leslie Thomas J. Perrelli Reporters Committee for Nathan C. Guerrero Freedom of the Press Brian Hauck 1815 N. Ft. Myer Dr., Suite 900 JENNER & BLOCK, LLC Arlington, VA 22209 601 13th Street, N.W. (703) 807-2100 Suite 1200 Counsel for amicus curiae Washington, D.C. 20005 Reporters Committee for (202) 639-6000 Freedom of the Press (202) 639-6066 (fax) Counsel for amici curiae Additional Counsel Listed on Inside Cover Richard M. Schmidt, Jr., Esq. Kevin M. Goldberg, Esq. Cohn and Marks LLP 1920 N St., N.W. Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 293-3860 Counsel for amicus curiae American Society of Newspaper Editors Richard Karpel Association of Alternative Newsweeklies 1020 Sixteenth Street, N.W., 4th Floor Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 822-1955 Counsel for amicus curiae Association of Alternative Newsweeklies -2- TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ......................................... iii INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE AND STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY FOR FILING .................................................1 ARGUMENT ......................................................3 I. THERE CAN BE NO LEGITIMATE DISPUTE THAT THE ACTIONS OF THE ST. MARY’S COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT ARE A CONTENT-BASED PRIOR RESTRAINT ON FULLY PROTECTED SPEECH .............5 A. The Seizure Violated Both the Publisher’s Right to Distribute Information and the Public’s Right to Receive Information. ................................6 B. The First Amendment Protects Against Informal Censorship No Less than Formal Censorship. .............8 II. THE FIRST AND FOURTH AMENDMENTS WERE ADOPTED EXPRESSLY TO PROHIBIT THE SORT OF CENSORSHIP – PERFORMED BY PRIVATE ENTITIES WITH THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS – THAT IS AT ISSUE HERE ...................10 A. Like the Actions Taken in the Present Case, 17th and 18th Century Restrictions on the Press Were Enforced by Friends of the Crown Acting With the Crown’s Full Consent and Encouragement. .........................11 B. Like the Actions Taken in the Present Case, 17th and 18th Century Restrictions on the Press were Intended to Suppress Speech Critica of Government Authorities. ......14 i C. Like the Actions Taken in the Present Case, 17th and 18th Century Restrictions on the Press were Broadly Focused on Circulation and Distribution, not Mere Printing. .........................................15 D. Like the Actions Taken in the Present Case, 17th and 18th Century Restrictions on the Press Involved Wanton Seizures of Papers, Without Judicial Oversight. ..........17 III. SECTION 1983 IS DIRECTED NOT SIMPLY AT ACTIONS BY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS BUT ALSO AT ACTIONS OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS TAKEN WITH THE ENCOURAGEMENT OR INDUCEMENT OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ...........................................20 A. Section 1983 Must Be Broadly Construed To Provide a Remedy for Any Violation of the First Amendment. .....20 B. The Framers of § 1983 Were Most Concerned About Violations of Rights by Private Actors With the Tacit Assent, Encouragement, or Participation of State Officials. .........................................24 C. Judicial Interpretation of § 1983 Reflects Its Roots and Ensures that the Statute Provides a Remedy for Public- Private Conspiracies. ...............................26 D. If the Trial Court’s Decision Is Allowed to Stand, It Will Give Public Officials Significant Incentives and Ability to Suppress Speech. ..................................30 CONCLUSION ...................................................32 ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144 (1970) ........................28 Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58 (1963) ......................3, 9 Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514 (2001) ...............................22 Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. PICO, 457 U.S. 853 (1982) ..............................7 Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616 (1886) ..........................18, 19 Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601 (1973) ...........................23 Buttner v. Miller, 4 F. Cas. 926 (C.C.S.D. Ala. 1871) .....................26 City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, 122 S. Ct. 1728 (2002) ..............22 Coming Up Inc. v. City & County of San Francisco, 857 F. Supp. 711 (N.D. Cal. 1994) ..............................................8 El Fundi v. Deroche, 625 F.2d 195 (5th Cir. 1980) .......................29 Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347 (1976) ....................................8 Entick v. Carrington, 19 How. St. Tr. 1029 (1765) .......................18 Grosjean v. American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233 (1936) .....................9 Lamont v. Postmaster General of the United States, 381 U.S. 301 (1965) ....7, 8 Lovell v. City of Griffin, 303 U.S. 444 (1938) ............................7 Lugar v. Edmonson Oil Co., 457 U.S. 922 (1982) .....................22, 27 iii Marcus v. Search Warrants of Property at 104 East Tenth Street, 367 U.S. 717 (1961) .......................................10, 19 Martin v. City of Struthers, 319 U.S. 141 (1943) ..........................8 Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo, 418 U.S. 241 (1974) ..............9 Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. v. Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue, 460 U.S. 575 (1983) ...................................9 Monell v. Department of Social Services of the City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (1978) ....................................20, 21, 24 New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) .................19 Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations, 413 U.S. 376 (1973) ...........................................6 R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992) ..........................23 Revene v. Charles County Commissioners, 882 F.2d 870 (4th Cir. 1989) ......27 Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980) ..............6, 7 Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) .................................14 Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748 (1976) ................................8 STATUTES 47 U.S.C. § 1993 .............................................. passim Md. Ann. Code art. 27, § 345 ........................................29 iv LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS Cong. Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess. (1871) ........................21, 24, 25 H.R. 320, 42d Cong. (1871) .........................................22 S. 243, 42d Cong. (1871) ...........................................22 MISCELLANEOUS 15A C.J.S. Conspiracy (1955) .......................................27 David Achtenberg, A "Milder Measure of Villainy": The Unknown History of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Meaning of “Under Color Of” Law, 1999 Utah L. Rev. 1 (1999) ............................21 4 William Blackstone, Commentaries .................................15 Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Edward Carrington (Jan. 16, 1787) in The Founders’ Constitution (Philip B. Kurland & Ralph Lerner eds., 1987) ............................................16 Nelson B. Lasson, The History and Development of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution (1957) ................18 Fredrick S. Siebert, Freedom of the Press in England 1476-1776 (1952) ............................................11, 12, 13, 15 Statement of Constitutional Convention Delegate Hugh Williamson (Feb. 25-27, 1788) in The Complete Bill of Rights: The Drafts, Debates, Sources and Origins (Neil H. Cogan ed. 1997) .............13 Joseph Story, 3 Commentaries on the Constitution § 1876 (1833) in The Founders’ Constitution (Philip B. Kurland & Ralph Lerner eds., 1987) ..................................................19 v St. George Tucker, 1 Blackstone’s Commentaries (1803) in The Founders’ Constitution (Philip B. Kurland & Ralph Lerner eds., 1987) ........17, 18 William H. Wackwar, The Struggle for the Freedom of the Press (1928) ...............................................13, 15, 16 Steven L. Winter, The Meaning of "Under Color Of" Law, 91 Mich. L. Rev. 323 (1992) ...........................................26 vi INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE AND STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY FOR FILING The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press is a voluntary, unincorporated association of reporters and editors that works to defend the First Amendment rights and freedom of information interest of the news media. The Reporters Committee has provided representation, guidance and research in First Amendment and Freedom of Information Act litigation since 1970. The American Society of Newspaper Editors is a nonprofit organization founded in 1922. It has a nationwide membership of approximately