At stake is right to self-determination

Jan. 3—On this frigid January morning, hundreds trekked to the U.S. Southern District Federal Court in downtown New York City to witness the civil case of Viola Plummer vs. NYC Council Speaker Christine Quinn. They soon filled the courtroom to capacity. The overflow crowd watched via satellite from another room, and more filled the halls. Clearly the Sonny Carson street name saga continues to resonate among Black and progressive New Yorkers.

Ms. Quinn’s vast array of detractors stood united in opposition to her positions on legislation affecting grassroots, working-class Black people. Leading activists spoke out at a press conference in front of the courthouse. Among them, Nellie Bailey of the Harlem Tenants Association addressed Quinn’s support of Columbia University’s takeover of Harlem; and Imani Henry, a leader in the Black lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community cited Quinn’s support of police harassment and deafening silence on hate crimes against Black LGBT youth.

“This case centers on a fundamental issue for Black people all around this country,” explained supporter Kamau Brown. “Street name changes, gentrification, nooses, police terrorism, mob attacks, it all adds up to plain old racism. It’s systemic. It’s in City Hall, the police department, the Board of Education, health care. People don’t have a choice but to fight, every step of the way.”

Ms. Plummer, chief of staff to City Councilman Charles Barron, is suing Speaker Quinn for $1 million for summary termination. Quinn’s unprecedented action stemmed from a raucous City Council meeting where the issue of the Carson street name change was debated. Her attorneys on the NYC Corporation Counsel filed a motion to dismiss the case.

Many news outlets paint a hyped picture of “assassination” talk against Councilman Leroy Comrie in this case. While it was raised to buttress Quinn’s defense, the defendant’s principal issue is Ms. Plummer’s “disruptive” behavior in the Council chamber during the Sonny Carson street debate. Ms. Plummer allegedly loudly called Ms. Quinn and Councilman Michael Nelson, “liar” during their testimony about Mr. Carson, thereby disrupting the meeting and council operations, although the vote and meeting continued until adjourned. The Corporation Counsel argued, “Disruptive speech is not protected by the First Amendment.”

Attorneys Roger Wareham and Noah Kinigstein represented the plaintiff, Ms. Plummer; and Attorneys James Lemonedes and Paul Marks represented the defendant, Ms. Quinn. Both sides argued the motion on the grounds of the First Amendment right to freedom of speech, equal protection, and due process. Judge William H. Pauley III, a President Clinton appointee, presided.

Judge Pauley brusquely demanded facts on “how the meeting and council operations were disrupted.” Attorney Lemonedes’ inability to substantiate crucial arguments was awkward. A particular point of contention focused on his claim of Ms. Plummer’s history of “disruptive” behavior in council meetings. The judge questioned his attempt to “conflate” an unrelated incident in his argument.

Lemonedes cited a public safety meeting, he could not recall the date, where Ms. Plummer “gasped and said ‘wow,’ thereby disrupting the meeting and council operations.” Further questioning revealed the meeting took place over five months before the Carson vote. Mr. Lemonedes gave no explanation for the delayed report of the incident by Councilman Peter Vallone Jr. Nor could he explain how the meeting was “disrupted.” He only stated, “The incident contributed to Ms. Quinn’s state of mind in evaluating Ms. Plummer’s behavior.”

Ms. Plummer later explained the incident to supporters. The public safety meeting was held in the wake of the racially controversial police killing of Sean Bell. “Police Commissioner Kelly was in the meeting and Councilwoman Leticia James attempted to criticize the police department. Kelly stopped her in her tracks by abruptly saying, ‘That’s not what you said behind closed doors.’ That’s when I gasped and said ‘wow.’ Vallone looked at me but he did not say anything.”

“Your Honor, first we need to put all of this in context,” Plummer’s attorney Roger Wareham declared. “This is a question of racism and the Constitution. The racist and unprecedented actions taken by the Speaker, against the Bedford Stuyvesant community in their attempt to change Gates Avenue to Sonny Abubadika Carson Street, led to all of this. After community leaders utilized all legal means to rename the street, the Speaker inserted herself into the process, demanding Carson's name be removed. She declared him ‘too divisive.’ Ironically, Quinn herself previously renamed a street in midtown after the original black-faced minstrel, Al Jolson.”

“Sonny Carson was a convenient target, her ‘race card’ to garner political support on the ‘right’ in her mayoral bid. Her racist motivation continued with her unilateral termination of Ms. Plummer. There are guidelines laid out in the NYC Charter, the Administrative Code, and the Council Ethics and Standards Committee, which deal with disciplinary issues. Ms. Plummer was denied all of these,” Wareham continued.

“The Speaker has no authority here. Ms. Plummer has been denied due process to a disciplinary hearing in the council. No one, not Councilman Comrie, not Councilman Nelson, not even the Speaker herself, ever made any official complaint against Ms. Plummer.”

Wareham explained that Ms. Plummer is an employee of Councilman Barron. “It is unprecedented that a Speaker has dared to dictate who an elected official can have on his staff. The Speaker has jurisdiction over the Council central staff only.”

On the issue of Councilman Comrie, Wareham said, “My client was not acting in any official capacity. She is an independent veteran community leader in this city and was speaking to her constituents outside City Hall on the plaza. She is protected by the First Amendment to state her personal views.”

At the last minute Attorney Lemonedes scrambled to insert the issue of “qualified immunity,” legislation which protects government officials in civil law suits.

Judge Pauley’s ruling on the motion is expected in the coming weeks.

Amadi Ajamu is an organizer with the Brooklyn-based December 12^th Movement.