Clean Up City of St. Augustine, Florida: Motion for Temporary Restraining Order Filed in Bloomberg v. JEREMIAH RAY BLOCKER & ST. Johns County

Plaintiff's counsel, Rook Elizabeth Ringer, has requested the U.S. District Court issue a temporary restraining order against ST. JOHNS COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS and our discriminatory BoCC Chair JEREMIAH RAY BLOCKER:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

SARA BLOOMBERG, Plaintiff,
v.

JEREMIAH RAY BLOCKER, in his personal and professional capacity as the chair of St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners, and as Commissioner for District 4; and the ST. JOHNS COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS;

Defendants.

Case No.: 3:21-cv-00575-TJC-JRK Timothy J. Corrigan, Judge
James R. Klindt, Magistrate Judge

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER OR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, SARA BLOOMBERG (hereinafter, the “Plaintiff’), by and through the undersigned counsel and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a) and 65(b), and moves this Court to issue a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction against Defendants, JEREMIAH RAY BLOCKER, in his personal and professional capacity as Chair of the St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners, and the ST. JOHNS COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, (hereinafter collectively, the “Defendants”) and state in support thereof:

Page 1 of 8

Case 3:21-cv-00575-TJC-JRK Document 4 Filed 06/06/21 Page 2 of 8 PageID 16

1. Plaintiff, whose requests for the discussion of an agenda item proposing a proclamation celebrating the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (hereinafter, “LGBTQ”) civil rights progress and the contributions of the LGBTQ individuals to the St. Johns County community (hereinafter, the “LGBTQ Pride Proclamation”) were discriminatorily and unlawfully denied by the Defendants, and the Plaintiff, as well as the LGBTQ community within St. Johns County, Florida have been directly affected by this discriminatory treatment, seek a Temporary Restraining Order or, in the alternative, a Preliminary Injunction, requiring the Defendants to immediately and publicly discuss the LGBT Proclamation and bring it to a public vote of the St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners, in line with Florida state law, federal Constitutional protections, and the St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners’ own rules and regulations.

2. The St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners describes proclamations as follows:

A proclamation is an official document endorsed by the entire St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners to commemorate a specific time period, event, or accomplishment impacting a large number of St. Johns County, Florida, or United States residents. They may also be given for the purpose of raising awareness about an issue, to celebrate a milestone, or serve as an expression of support for individuals, community organizations, and businesses.

“Proclamation, Certificate of Recognition, and Presentation Requests”; St. Johns County Government; retrieved, June 6, 2021, from <http://www.co.st- johns.fl.us/Proclamations/index.aspx>.

Page 2 of 8

Case 3:21-cv-00575-TJC-JRK Document 4 Filed 06/06/21 Page 3 of 8 PageID 17

3. However, the Defendants failed to even appropriately address this issue publicly or through any legitimate public discussion, and therefore violated the Florida’s Government in the Sunshine Law, §§ 286.011 and 286.0114, Florida Statutes (hereinafter, the “Sunshine Law”).

4. Furthermore, the Plaintiff argues that the refusal to consider the LGBT Pride Proclamation was unlawful viewpoint discrimination and/or violations of the the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and 42 U.S.C. § 1988.

5. The very words used to deny even putting the LGBT Pride Proclamation on the agenda were that it was too “controversial” and suggested that it was too “left leaning”. See, Complaint, [Dkt. #1], ¶ 14. The wording of the phone call stated an unwritten policy exists (also a Sunshine Law violation in itself) that any proclamations which were too “right” or “left” would not be placed on the agenda.

6. On the other hand, the St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners have enacted or placed on the agenda proclamations recognizing different months in celebration of other various minorities’ history or achievements, such as:

 A Proclamation Recognizing May 2020 as Florida Jewish History Month; and

 A Proclamation Recognizing February 2021 as Black History Month.
7. In fact, the St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners have enacted or placed on the agenda proclamations honoring local religious institutions,

such as:

Page 3 of 8

Case 3:21-cv-00575-TJC-JRK Document 4 Filed 06/06/21 Page 4 of 8 PageID 18

 A Proclamation Recognizing the 200th Anniversary of Trinity Parish Church (2021);

8.
have enacted or placed on the agenda “controversial” proclamations, such as:

Furthermore, the St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners

 A Proclamation recognizing October 14, 2019 as Columbus Day. See, Agenda of October 1, 2019, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, p. 1.
The 2019 Columbus Day proclamation is notable, given that local

9.
newspaper the St. Augustine Record published an article on the controversy. See, Lowery, M.M., “Why more places are abandoning Columbus Day in favor of Indigenous Peoples’ Day”; Oct 14, 2019; retrieved June 6, 2021, from Webcache at <https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:OxgGtXRmkRAJ:https ://www.staugustine.com/zz/news/20191014/why-more-places-are-abandoning- columbus-day-in-favor-of-indigenous-peoples-day+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us>.

10. Local news station First Coast News also did a story on the controversy. Royal, A., “'Columbus Day' name draws mixed reactions on social media: Some argue that the day should be renamed 'Indigenous Peoples' Day.'” Retrieved June 6, 2021, from <https://www .firstcoastnews.com/article/news/local/christopher-columbus- day-mixed-reactions-in-san-diego/509-6b55474e-53ef-4432-945a-444e52eac28b>.

11. In fact, in Tampa, in 2020, the protests against Columbus Day led to a “stand off” with law enforcement against approximately 100 protesters who argued that Columbus “brought genocide to this continent”. Burton, J.J., “Protest calls for the removal of Christopher Columbus statue in Tampa: Protest heated up when TPD

Page 4 of 8

Case 3:21-cv-00575-TJC-JRK Document 4 Filed 06/06/21 Page 5 of 8 PageID 19

showed up <https://www .abcactionnews.com/news/region-hillsborough/protest- calls-for-the-removal-of-christopher-columbus-statue-in-tampa>.

12. At the October 1, 2019 meeting, representatives from the Knights of Columbus, a right wing, anti-LGBTQ, religious organization, spoke in favor of the Columbus Day resolution. See, Agenda of October 1, 2019 Meeting, attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, p. 2.

13. Generally, protests relating to Columbus Day are led by “left-leaning” groups, whereas only “right-leaning” groups would protest the LGBTQ minority community .

14. On information and belief, Defendant Jeremiah Ray Blocker (hereinafter, “Chairman Blocker”) believes that, regardless of what his representatives have stated otherwise, proclamations that favor controversial “right wing” causes, such as Columbus Day, can be placed on the agenda, whereas proclamations that are opposed by right wing individuals, such as himself, are secretly precluded from being put on the agenda.

15. Defendants' content and viewpoint-based restriction on the Plaintiff’s speech through the refusal to put the LGBT Pride Proclamation on the agenda deprived Plaintiffs of equal access to a limited public forum because of the content and viewpoint conveyed by the LGBT Pride Proclamation, in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and Article I, Section 4 of the Florida State Constitution.

Page 5 of 8

Case 3:21-cv-00575-TJC-JRK Document 4 Filed 06/06/21 Page 6 of 8 PageID 20

16. Defendants further violated the right to equal protection under the law, when Defendants intentionally discriminated against the Plaintiff because the LGBT Pride Proclamation is a pro-LGBTQ viewpoint. This violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 2 of the Florida State Constitution.

17. Immediate and irreparable harm will occur in absence of the temporary restraining order or, in the alternative, preliminary injunction is not issued because Defendants' decision is an unlawful infringement on Plaintiff's exercise of free speech, which always constitutes irreparable harm. Cate v. Oldham. 707 F.2d 1176, 1188 (11th Cir.1983) (irreparable injury presumed from violation of First Amendment rights; Deerfield Med. Ctr. v. City of Deerfield Beach. 661 F.2d 328,338 (5th Cir. Unit B 1981) (irreparable injury presumed from violation of right to privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment); Northeastern Florida Chapter of Ass'n of Gen. Contractors v. City of Jacksonville. Florida, 896 F.2d 1283, 1285-86 (11th Cir.1990) (explaining that the basis for presuming irreparable injury in Cate and Deerfield was that given the "intangible nature" of the violations alleged, the plaintiffs could not effectively be compensated by an award of monetary damages); Cf. Richard Feiner & Co. v. Turner Entm't Co., 98 F.3d 33. 34 (2d Cir.1996).

18. Additionally, June is nationally recognized as “LGBTQ Pride Month”, and it has already begun. For example, on June 1, 2021, President Joe Biden issued “A Proclamation on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Pride Month, 2021”, stating:

Page 6 of 8

Case 3:21-cv-00575-TJC-JRK Document 4 Filed 06/06/21 Page 7 of 8 PageID 21

NOW, THEREFORE, I, JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2021 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Pride Month. I call upon the people of the United States to recognize the achievements of the LGBTQ+ community, to celebrate the great diversity of the American people, and to wave their flags of pride high.

Briefing Room, The White House, June 01, 2021, Presidential Actions, retrieved June 6, 2021, from https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing- room/presidential-actions/2021/06/01/a-proclamation-on-lesbian-gay-bisexual- transgender-and-queer-pride-month-2021/> Attached hereto as Exhibit “C”.

19. Although June has already begun, Plaintiff’s counsel has worked diligently to file the instant action as expeditiously as possible.

20. In support of this Motion, the Plaintiff proffers Exhibits A-C as already referenced herein.

WHEREFORE, for all of the reasons stated above, Plaintiffs respectfully ask this Court to grant the relief requested in Paragraph one of this Motion.