|

Last Updated:
Tuesday, November 19, 2002
| |

ACLUM Agrees to Represent Nambla in
Freedom of Speech Case
The ACLU of Massachusetts has agreed to represent the North American Man Boy Love
Association (NAMBLA) in a civil lawsuit brought in U.S. District Court by the family of
Jeffrey Curley.
The suit, an action for wrongful death and for civil rights violations, alleges that
NAMBLA is responsible for the kidnapping, rape and murder of the 10-year-old boy by
Charles Jaynes and Salvatore Sicari because its publications and the material which
appeared on its Internet site "urged the general public to illegally rape male
children." The plaintiffs claim that Jaynes and become a member of NAMBLA
approximately one year prior to the murder and that, as a result of reading its
publications and the material on its web site, "became obsessed with having sex with
and raping young male children."
NAMBLA, which takes the position that sexual relationships between men and boys can be
appropriate and should be legal, is considered to be one of the most controversial
organizations in the United States.
ACLUM Executive Director John Roberts described the concerns which prompted ACLUM to take
on NAMBLAs defense. "While we join with all others in deploring the heinous
crimes committed against Jeffrey Curley, two people have been convicted of his murder and
are serving life sentences. The Curley lawsuit seeks millions of dollars in damages
against NAMBLA because one of the murderers allegedly looked at the organizations
publications and web site prior to committing the crimes. There was nothing in those
publications or web site which advocated or incited the commission of any illegal acts,
including murder or rape."
The web site contained materials that advocated for legislative change of age-of-consent
laws concerning sex between adults and adolescents and included statements by various
writers, including Allen Ginsburg and Camille Paglia, references to academic journals
about sexuality, some fiction and poetry, and a clear statement against coercive sex or
breaking the law. NAMBLAs publications, principally the NAMBLA Bulletin, contain the
same types of material, interspersed with eroticized depictions of young boys.
ACLUM Legal Director John Reinstein, who is one of the lawyers representing NAMBLA in the
suit, acknowledged that "I think it is fair to say that most people disagree with
NAMBLA and that many would find its publications offensive. Regardless of whether people
agree with or abhor NAMBLAs views, holding the organization responsible for crimes
committed by others who read their materials would gravely endanger important First
Amendment freedoms."
Reinstein maintains that in "Brandenburg v. Ohio", the Supreme Court has made it
clear that a speech or publication is protected under the First Amendment unless it is
directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or
produce such action. NAMBLAs materials are simply not in this category. While
NAMBLA may extol conduct which is currently illegal, its materials fall far short of
speech that may be prohibited. If that rule were to be changed to allow a suit like this
one, it would introduce a regime of conformity to majority rule that would threaten the
very right to dissent."
While intent on pressing their suit against NAMBLA, the Curley family has acknowledged
ACLUs concerns. In a Boston Globe article which appeared shortly after the ACLU
entered the case, Jeffrey Curleys father, Bob Curley, is quoted as saying that he
harbors no ill feelings toward the ACLU for defending the case. "I really do have
respect for them (ACLU)", said Curley. "They are very consistent in whom they
defend. It takes a lot of nerve to defend the groups they have over the years. They have a
lot of courage."
A legal brief filed in the case can be read online at:
http://www.aclu.org/court/nambla.pdf
ACLU statement on defending free speech of unpopular
organizations
|