UNITED STATES OF AMERICA V. CRIMINAL NO. 87-62 JUDGE RICHEY WILLIAM THOMAS
question - which prohibits camping in Lafayette Park - infringes
upon defendants' exercise of a legitimate religious belief by
forcing them to choose between carrying out a practice that is a cornerstone of their religion, and breaking the law. Not one of the defendants has so much as claimed that camping in Lafayette Park is a basic tenet of his or her religion, and that if he or she is prevented from camping in Lafayette Park, he or she will be unable to exercise his or her religious beliefs.1/ Indeed, such a claim cannot be made: even if the regulation against camping is enforced, defendant Ellen Thomas can still communicate her beliefs to people from all over the world in Lafayette Park 24 hours a day (Ellen Thomas Declaration at p.5), defendant Philip Joseph can be at Lafayette Park to communicate the message of God (Philip Joseph Declaration at p.2), defendant Sunrise can promote non-violence in Lafayette Park with signs around the clock (Sunrise Declaration at p.2), and defendant William Thomas can continue to carry on his continuous, expressive presence (William Thomas' Motion To Reconsider at p.2). Enforcement of the regulation against camping will not prevent any of these activities. In sum, not one of the defendants has come close to making out a claim that enforcement of the camping regulation will infringe the exercise of their religious beliefs.
"nor have defendants asserted that 'camping in Lafayette Park is the cornerstone of a religious ritual central to the exercise of their religion. '" Motion To Reconsider at p.2.
Malicious Prosecution, Ex Post Facto Enforcement, Necessity Defense and Discovery, the government relies on its response to defendant's original motions.
JOSEPH E. DIGENOVA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
/s/ linda s. chapman
LINDA S. CHAPMAN
Assistant United States
/s/ linda s chapman
LINDA S. CHAPMAN
Assistant United States Attorney
555 4th Street, NW., Room 5915
Washington, D.C. 20001