Editor’s note: Sarpy County District Judge William Zastera on June 30 dismissed an appeal from Shirley Phelps-Roper, allowing prosecutors to move forward with their case against her. Zastera said the lower court’s ruling issued earlier this year isn’t something that Phelps-Roper can appeal.
OMAHA Neb. — A Sarpy County judge has denied a challenge to Nebraska's
flag-desecration statute raised by a Kansas woman who argues it violates her
right to free speech.
Judge Todd Hutton ruled yesterday that prosecutors can proceed with their
case against Shirley Phelps-Roper. She is a member of the Westboro Baptist
Church of Topeka, Kan., whose members believe that U.S. troop deaths are
punishment for the nation's tolerance of homosexuality. The group has protested
at military funerals nationwide.
Authorities say Phelps-Roper let her 10-year-old son stand on an American
flag at the funeral of a National Guardsman in June 2007 in Bellevue. They also
say she wore a flag as a skirt that dragged on the ground.
Nebraska's law against flag desecration prohibits intentionally "casting
contempt or ridicule" upon a flag by mutilating, defacing, defiling, burning and
trampling it. Violating the law carries a misdemeanor charge.
The Nebraska Supreme Court is responsible for deciding whether a law violates
the state Constitution, Hutton said. The case remains in a county court, which
has limited authority.
Nebraska lawmakers didn't change the law after the U.S. Supreme Court struck
down Texas' flag-desecration law in its 1998 ruling Texas
v. Johnson.
"The Nebraska Supreme Court has yet to reconcile the findings" in the U.S.
Supreme Court’s Texas v. Johnson ruling and other flag cases, Hutton
said.
That, Hutton said, "warrants a measured response" in deciding whether the
charges should be dismissed, adding that it is "manifestly strong medicine" if a
court allows charges to be thrown out because the law's wording is too
broad.
"Great deference is given to the presumption of constitutionality of laws
enacted by the Nebraska Legislature," Hutton wrote.
Although Nebraska's law is vulnerable when challenged on its face, it "can be
narrowly applied to those circumstances where an accused, through words and
conduct of an inherently inflammatory nature, intentionally seeks to create an
environment designed to provoke a person to retaliate, thereby inciting a breach
of peace."
Phelps-Roper's attorney, Bassel El-Kasaby, said he disagreed with the
decision but saw good in it, too.
El-Kasaby said he read Hutton's decision as saying that El-Kasaby may have
something to his argument, but it needs to be heard by higher courts.
Had Hutton allowed the motion to throw out the charges, the case would be
done but the law would remain.
El-Kasaby said he was inclined to appeal now with hopes of eventually having
the case heard by the Court of Appeals, or ultimately, the Nebraska Supreme
Court.
"That's where my battle to invalidate the statute would actually mean
something," he said.
Sarpy County Attorney Lee Polikov, who's prosecuting the case, called the
decision a victory.
"I believe he's absolutely correct that we ought not to be fighting an issue
of constitutionality, it's a question of violation of a law, and that's what we
intend to do," he said.
He said he wasn't sure whether the order could be appealed. He said if that
was what El-Kasaby pursued, he'd be ready to object.
El-Kasaby had argued during a November hearing that the five methods listed
in the flag-desecration law were open to interpretation and could leave people
confused about how they could use the flag in a protest.
Prosecutors argue the law is valid because it leaves open all methods for
protest other than the five stated.
Phelps-Roper also faces charges of disturbing the peace, contributing to the
delinquency of a minor and negligent child abuse.
El-Kasaby has argued that although those laws aren't unconstitutional, their
application is because the charges stem from the flag-desecration charge.
Phelps-Roper, too, applauded the decision. It's a "golden opportunity to
preach the word of God to this nation and to this generation," she said.
Eventually, the case will have to go away, she said.
"At the end of the day they cannot charge me with a crime, because that
little guy lawfully stood on their idol," she said, referring to her son.