The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Oregon filed a suit against the city of Medford, alleging the city’s police department illegally collected and stored information on social justice groups and activists.
The suit, filed Tuesday, claims the Medford Police Department (MPD) kept “tabs” on these groups in violation of Oregon state law, which prohibits law enforcement agencies from collecting or maintaining information “about the political, religious, or social views” and “associations or activities of people who are not reasonably suspected of criminal activities.”
“This law is an important protection against police abuses, yet the MPD has publicly declared that they intend to continue their monitoring practices — leaving Oregonians engaged in protected First Amendment activities wrongly subject to surveillance,” the ACLU of Oregon said in a statement.
The suit was filed in the Jackson County, Ore., Circuit Court on behalf of two local organizations, including Rogue Valley Pepper Shakers, which describes itself as an “unincorporated association” advocating for “queer people, unhoused people, and other groups who are similarly marginalized in Southern Oregon.” The second nonprofit, Stabbin Wagon, helps provide harm reduction and overdose prevention supplies for southern Oregon.
The third plaintiff is an individual described as a community advocate and former executive director of Stabbin Wagon.
The plaintiffs claimed documents obtained through public records requests show the MPD conducted unlawful surveillance of progressive individuals and groups advocating for “racial justice, LGTBQ rights, reproductive rights, housing justice, harm reduction, decriminalization, government transparency and protection of the environment.”
The department allegedly monitored social media accounts, the suit stated.
The city of Medford told The Hill it refutes the claims of the lawsuit, arguing the statute in question is “focused on information-gathering specifically about the ‘political, religious or social views’ of individuals.”
“The purpose of reviewing publicly-available information on social media channels is not to analyze or judge individuals’ political, religious, or social views, but to address legitimate police interests regarding public rallies and protests,” a city spokesperson wrote.
The spokesperson said police review publicly available social media to “address legitimate public safety concerns,” including possible traffic disruptions, breaches of peace, potential conflicts between protesters and counterprotesters and risks of property damage or violence.
The spokesperson pointed to “conflicts and traffic disruptions” in Medford on June 1, 2020. While it did not specify the events, hundreds of protesters gathered on that day in response to the police killing of George Floyd.