UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MARY HUDDLE, et al.,
v. Civil Action No. 88-3130-JHG
RONALD WILSON REAGAN, et al., OCT 12 1990
Defendants. CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
On September 18, 1990, plaintiffs filed motions for a writ
of mandamus and for a temporary restraining order, alleging that
on or about June 13, 1990, park officers seized two flags used
by plaintiffs in violation of their first amendment rights. In
their September 24, 1990 opposition to plaintiffs' motions, defendants
contend that the flags were seized because they were affixed to
a sign, thereby making the signs larger than permitted by regulation,
and that the flags may be used as evidence in a possible criminal
On September 28, 1990, plaintiffs filed a conditional motion
to withdraw their motions of September 18, 1990 in the event that
the Court does not resolve this matter quickly and in their favor.
Defendants subsequently informed the Court on October 4,
1990 in a supplemental memorandum concerning plaintiffs' motion
for a temporary restraining order and petition for a writ of mandamus
that "the Criminal Division has now decided that it will
not prosecute Picciotto for her June 13, 1990 violation"
and that "[i]n light of that decision, defendants have no
objection to the return to Picciotto of her flags." Defendants'
Supplemental Memorandum, p. 2.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that the flags shall be made available for
return to plaintiffs as immediately as possible and no later than
October 16, 1990.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
October 12, 1990.
/s/Joyce Hens Green
JOYCE HENS GREEN
United States District Judge