Federal appeals court mandates trial within 6 months on claims of St. Louis police protest abuse

Support Local Journalism

Your membership makes our reporting possible.

{{featured_button_text}}

Officers are barred from ordering crowds to disperse without providing specifics about what area they must leave and what chemical will be used, as well as giving them time and a way to leave.

The lawsuit brought by the ACLU names the city of St. Louis and was prompted by police activities during protests that followed the acquittal of former St. Louis police officer Jason Stockley on a murder charge for the fatal shooting of Anthony Lamar Smith in 2011.

“Given the events in the fall of 2017, we do not question the district court’s decision to issue a preliminary injunction that included affirmative mandates pending a prompt trial on the merits of plaintiffs’ claims for a permanent injunction,” the opinion said, using italics to emphasize the point.

Perry referred the case to mediation, but no deal could be struck. Further delays were related to the motion to seek class action status, the opinion said.

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Ralph R. Erickson said that he would have rejected the city’s appeal of the preliminary injunction because city officials waited too long to file it. He pointed out the delay was also due to the hiring of new lawyers, the COVID-19 pandemic and “the general difficulty in holding court due to civil unrest during the summer of 2020.”

In a footnote, the opinion warns that the ban on the use of chemical agents unless there is probable cause for an arrest exceeds past opinions by appeals courts in civil rights cases and “would not be sufficient to support a … permanent injunction.” Another footnote warns the plaintiffs, who are represented by the ACLU, that if they request more time to collect evidence, Perry should dissolve the temporary injunction.