Federal lawsuit filed against city of Ann Arbor, police chief for ticketing Planned Parenthood protester
Paul Dobrowolski of Saline has been protesting outside of an Ann Arbor Planned Parenthood clinic with signs in his car for more than a year. A federal civil rights lawsuit has been brought against the City of Ann Arbor on his behalf on the grounds that Dobrowolski's First Amendment rights were removed when he was ticketed by the Ann Arbor Police Department for a sign in his car.
Courtesy of the American Freedom Law Center
The national non-profit center filed the lawsuit on behalf of Paul Dobrowolski of Saline, a pro-life advocate who has displayed anti-abortion signs in his vehicle that he parked on a public street outside of the Planned Parenthood Ann Arbor Health Center on Professional Drive for more than one year.
The City of Ann Arbor has ticketed Dobrowolski on May 29 and June 4 last year for displaying signs in his vehicle, and on two occasions, he has paid $25 fines to the city.
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The City of Ann Arbor will have 21 days to respond to the suit after they are served.
“We have not been served with the lawsuit at this time. I cannot comment on the lawsuit until we are served,” said City Attorney Stephen Postema in an email.
A Judeo-Christian national non-profit organization, the American Freedom Law Center works to protect the free speech rights of those who protest abortion.
The sign in Paul Dobrowolski's car that the city says violates code because it's an advertisement.
Courtesy of the American Freedom Law Center
Ann Arbor’s City Code states that a person is not allowed to park a vehicle on a city roadway for the principal purpose of displaying advertising.
Specifically, Dobrowolski's “Free Ultrasound” sign was considered to be advertising by the Ann Arbor Police Department and was the reason Dobrowolski was ticketed.
The lawsuit claims that Dobrowolski’s signs are all political speech and protected by his First Amendment rights. It also seeks to challenge the City’s code.
Dobrowolski deferred comment to his lawyer in the case, Robert Muise, who also is the co-founder of AFLC.
During a hearing in which Dobrowolski contested the June 4 ticket, an AAPD employee testified that she was directed to ticket Dobrowolski by her supervisor after a complaint from a business in the area, Muise said.
Dobrowolski also was notified on May 22, 25 and 31 of last year that he had 48 hours to move his vehicle or it would be considered abandoned and impounded. As a part of his protest outside of the Planned Parenthood facility in Ann Arbor, he also distributes pro-life literature and holds signs.
“The City’s content-based restriction on our client’s pro-life, political speech cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny. Indeed, it is evident that the City of Ann Arbor is targeting our client’s speech because it is pro-life and likely harming Planned Parenthood’s abortion business,” according to a statement by Muise.
Other signs in Paul Dobrowolski's car that the city previously determined don't violate code because they're political statements.
Courtesy of the American Freedom Law Center
Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Desiree Cooper said there are a number of health centers that have regular protesters.
“Our feeling … is this is the United States of America and people have the right to free speech. We never engage with protesters, nor try to move them or try to abridge their right to free speech,” Cooper said.
Cooper said there have been no issues with threatening behavior from protesters and that typically they follow local ordinances for the distance they are required to stand from the Planned Parenthood facility. Typically, it’s the same protesters that appear outside of local Planned Parenthood health centers each time, Cooper said.
“We ask that (protesters) respect the rights of our patients,” Cooper said. “People can say what they want to say, and that’s a fact of life.”
Amy Biolchini covers Washtenaw County, health and environmental issues for AnnArbor.com. Reach her at (734) 623-2552, amybiolchini@annarbor.com or on Twitter.
Comments
Randy Dieter
Thu, Apr 25, 2013 : 3:34 p.m.
To leezee . . . . . . . . . I am one of those "men protestors" who stands-up with Mr. Dobrowolski, for something we feel strongly about. My wife and I adopted our beautiful daughter 24 years ago; and she could have just as easily been one of those millions of babies who have been aborted over the years. Instead, her 15 year old birth mom was courageous enough to have her God-given baby; and even more courageous to do the right thing and give the baby up to a loving family. To all you females who argue that it is easy for men to protest because they don't have to go through a pregnancy, I say this : "The easy fix is to have an abortion." "It takes more courage to do the right thing and have the baby!" Men DO have a stake in the issue of abortion.
winterblue
Thu, Apr 25, 2013 : 2:36 a.m.
People have been protesting outside this location for years. It seems to me that if the city of Ann Arbor had a problem with the message being presented they would find a way to ticket ALL people who presented said message day after day and year after year. While it is weird that it took them over a year to finally write this ticket, it seems within their jurisdiction to do so. He is being allowed to continue without the sign in question as the article states. That seems appropriate per the law in question.
Tru2Blu76
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 4:19 p.m.
From the Lord's Prayer: "Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven." Christians know this prayer is given to us by the Lord Jesus Christ. But Jesus didn't tell us what the Will of God is in every circumstance, He just taught that we should accept God's Will. So, in this case, we have two different conclusions being made about the Will of God - because it's supposed to be effective in both Heaven and Earth. Is my understanding correct or not? Mr. Dobrowolski's conclusion is that God's Will protects fetuses. Many women question this, and whether they know it or not, they are saying that, If God willed against women deciding to abort fetuses, He would have and could have made women abortion-proof. It's crystal clear that women are not abortion-proof by either accident, medical conditions or by any woman's choice. Therefore, it is MORE logical to conclude that God's Will favors freedom of choice for women - which just happens to be supported in the Bill of Rights. That doesn't mean Mr. Dobrowolski's choice should be prohibited from public display. Even a WRONG CONCLUSION should be displayed so that people can see Mr. Dobrowolski's erroneous conclusion regarding the Will of God. Censoring such protected free expression is also wrong - it accurately displays errors as well as truths.
jcj
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 4:18 p.m.
Suppose he legally parked a vehicle that had a sign painted on the side. Like say aaa plumbing , wisk house cleaning, green grass lawn care? Those are advertisement, so it is not the ad its the content! Don't be hypocrites call it what it is legalized selective enforcement!
Tru2Blu76
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:08 p.m.
Using the right to free speech to advocate restricting freedom of independent choice? Hmm, seems this is another example of ideological beliefs running amok in contradictory fashion. America is all about individual freedoms as enumerated in the Bill of Rights - now all we have to do is find universal understanding of the words "freedom" and "rights." And it's not just the ideological right, the ideological left does "just as well" with their own popular notions involving the Bill of Rights. The U.S. Constitution itself would not have been adopted if Congress (its chief proponent at the time) had not bowed to the insistent demand for inclusion of the Bill of Rights - which took the form of the Amendments which have formed the basis of our protected freedoms (not "permissions granted"). Please DO notice that the attacks on the Bill of Rights all come from political party ideology - be they right or left-leaning. And what is the motive of every political party? It's not to "stand up for our protected freedoms" - usually the motive is to attract enough members and advocates to translate emotion-based opinions into "principles. If both parties accepts our protected freedoms, they would be only one purpose - the advocacy of our protected freedoms. Anti-abortion ideology is based on the notion that, if the right can take control of the government AND make freedom of choice a matter of getting government permission, "all will be well." And the left wants to do the same about our protected right to keep and bear arms. Both "sides" are toxic to protected freedoms.
vronnie
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:48 p.m.
Good for him and all the other protesters.
Dave
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:20 p.m.
This has nothing to do with abortion. Why can't you advertise? I could have a bumper sticker that says an advertisement. I could get one of those wraps for my car with an ad that makes my car beyond obnoxious. It's a stupid ordinance that is bypassed everyday by people.
kathryn
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:16 p.m.
Sure looks like advertising for Family Life Services. The other signs are OK.
Tom Joad
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 6:05 a.m.
This prohibition makes no sense. What about Car For Sale Signs? Those are assuredly advertising. An Acme Plumbing Logo on a van is advertising, too.
Gill
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 4:21 p.m.
Acme plumbing is required by law to display their name on the work vehicle, but not on their personal car.
DennisP
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 4:10 a.m.
I find these kinds of sign ordinances interesting--especially in terms of selective enforcement. In this instance, a sign that is intended to further this person's public pleas to seek alternatives to abortion (whether you agree with it or not) receives a citation for a sign ordinance violation. The sign ordinance exists ostensibly, to protect against crass use of vehicles as signage by those who won't or can't abide by the regular sign ordinance. Yet, as you go along Stadium, it's not hard to find signs advertising anything. The corner at Jackson and Stadium/Maple always has some sign in the right of way advertising a play, or an auction or haircuts or whatever. And, how about that window chip service at the Shell station? They put up a life size caricature holding a billboard tied right to the light pole at the corner. That's been there for years with alternating faces of Barack Obama and some cartoon character. I can't believe that meets any sign ordinance--perhaps it does, but it would be amazing. Yet, down the way, this little cardboard sign in a private car right down the road that clearly furthers this man's political and personal agenda and speech--whether you agree with it or not--seems to draw a citation. So much for the argument that "it's commercial speech and is subject to regulation"... In law, there are two concepts about the constitutionality of legislation: Constitutional on its face (de jure) or constitutional as applied (de facto). In this instance, the commercial sign legislation may be facially constitutional, but this application is highly suspect. Why even the Planned Parenthood director seems to advocate a "live and let live" (sarcasm intended) approach towards the protesters that often line the walk in front there. Given the complete lack of enforcement up and down that road, I would find it very hard to believe that this was a simple, non-politically motivated act on the part of a code enforcement officer
Gill
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 4:19 p.m.
I think most enforcement on signs is complaint based, so if you see some illegal signage call in a complaint.
Goober
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:14 p.m.
Welcome to Ann Arbor.
newsboy
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:35 a.m.
The bumper sticker on the back of the car reads "Women deserve better than abortion." Is this a promo for gay marriage?
newsboy
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:55 a.m.
This is another ordinance we don't need on the books. Personally I'm (pro-not-paying-for-your-unfunded-child), but this guy has the right to say what he wants. You have the right to say things likes "Religion is proof Darwin got it wrong; because some people haven't evolve from the primordial slime." I miss the graphic signs that look like pizza; they scare the little brats and make me so hungry!
Krupper1
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:42 a.m.
Even unpopular and disdainful speech deserves protection.
Taylormade
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:05 a.m.
I think the city is well within their rights to ticket this guy...The fact that it's a car that belongs to a guy that is against abortion is just a bonus..
chapmaja
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:35 a.m.
I personally don't agree with the use of his vehicle as a message board for his protests, BUT in this case I do feel the city ordinance is questionable at best and at worst a clear violation of his first amendment rights to free speech. The advertising section of the city code is a reach in my opinion because it does not clearly define advertising. The individual in question clearly complied with reasonable requests from the city regarding the placement of his vehicle. To me the City of Ann Arbor was clearly out to "get" this protester, and as such was using a very selective enforcement of their own rules to do so. The selective use of the ordinance is clearly not consistent with the enforcement in other areas of the city, and thus would be grounds for a lawsuit in this case.
Gill
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 4:15 p.m.
Can you site other cases of cars parked long-term on the road advertizing a service, please.
Tim Hornton
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:25 a.m.
As a former unborn baby fetus, I'm sure glad my mother didn't kill me while I was growing inside her. It doesn't get more barbaric then sucking a little baby out you and having it killed, but it's legal so who am I to judge unborn babies being killed.
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 4:36 a.m.
Your point is well taken, mpope. My invitation for the inquisitive is to check out the probabilities for themselves, and not default to bronze-age hand-me-downs.
mpope
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:25 a.m.
tim, ryan said, 'rest assured.' so please! feel free to not worry yourself about it any more. ryan isn't, see?
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:39 a.m.
Tim, rest assured that none of us would have known that we hadn't been born, much less lamented having been aborted.
KateT
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:20 a.m.
I think he should just leave out the one advertising sign and continue on with the other signs. He's apparently following his conscience and exercising his free speech. If he has to pay a $25 dollar fine, he's had his money's worth of advertising by having it published here!
Ed Kimball
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:33 a.m.
That appears to be what he's doing.
Sean Thomas
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:59 a.m.
you would think he would remove the sign and see if they ticket him again without advertising so he has a better case. But he knows they won't, and that he has no case, so he's suing now.
Cyb7
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:59 a.m.
I agree that his first amendment right was violated - and he has the sign inside his car, his property. His right of freedom of speech should be respected!!!
Gill
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 4:12 p.m.
But the car is in the public right-of-way and not on his property... There are rules for objects within the public right-of-way, like not being able put an inflatable swimming pool on the road.
UpperDecker
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 4:09 p.m.
True until you break a law that is already in the books. Then it is not true. Then you get ticketed.
bee
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:59 a.m.
Personal and political beliefs aside--if Dobrowolski is advertising (regardless of the content), then the city has legal grounds to ticket him.
Roadman
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:53 a.m.
I believe that a "time, place, manner" limitation argument that the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held is a constitutional limitation on First Amendment freedom of speech may apply to bar the suit here. The most important consideration is whether the goverment enforcement is "content neutral", in other words, they are not attacking the speech due to what it says. Also, the U.S. Supreme Court has held commmercial speech is less protected than political speech - and it is unclear whether this speech at issue is commercial or political in nature. The Westboro Baptist Church and Blaine Coleman First Amendment cases decided recently have illustrated that the federal courts are willing to give broad constitutional protections to those citizens who are engaging in First Amendment activity on matters of public interest. This is definitely going to be a very hotly disputed case on both sides and there is no clear answer on who is most likely to prevail.
Ed Kimball
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:32 a.m.
Since the city has allowed him to display the other two signs without ticketing him, I would argue that they are on solid ground for not attacking the "speech" due to what it says.
Elijah Shalis
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:42 a.m.
I bet all the pro life people are willing to adopt the baby and pay for its college education.
mpope
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:23 a.m.
so much misguided speculation. so little time. how about 'many'? can you bet 'many'? i can produce a list. can you bet the rest are willing to donate countless dollars, person-hours, transportation miles, resume/ employment/ housing help? because i can produce that list too.
Krupper1
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:44 a.m.
We already adopt many through our taxes
A2centsworth
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:38 a.m.
I am rather pleased by the police action as I find it hard to stomach the radical male pro-lifers. Before I see a man on the protest line I would like him to experience 9 months of pregnancy and birth, and if he does not do that, let him adopt an abandoned child or two before standing in my way waving his ridiculous sign when I go for my exam at the clinic. I applaud the cop who gave this annoying little man a ticket. Go home Mr. Dobrowolski and write a check to the homeless center where women are forced to take their children because men abuse them. Your 1st amendment rights do not trump mine.
harpua
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:40 p.m.
paul should take in / adopt some unwanted children. and stop stressing about what other people are doing.
A2centsworth
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:38 a.m.
Thank you Bryan.
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:35 a.m.
What, and abuse them with indoctrination into a religion that invented original sin and hell? Paul is not parent material.
Billy
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:30 p.m.
After he loses, please counter-sue him for legal costs.
Jack Gladney
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:28 p.m.
In other abortion mill news, a search of the term "Kermit Gosnell" yields "no results" on annarbor.com. Too offensive for its sensitive readership.
clownfish
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:14 p.m.
Jack, there were quite a few Ann Arbor residents in Boston running the race. 66 by this count. http://www.annarbor.com/news/boston-marathon-explosion-list-of-ann-arbor-participants-with-updates/ Is having 66 participants anything like having someones cousins friend around? How many articles in conservative newspapers and journals carried anything about Kermit Grosnell before his trial? Other than FOX, which conservative newspapers and journals had running commentary on the trial before it became another "liberal agenda" talking point? There is a trial going on now in Europe, a trial of a suspected Nazi, are you outraged that you don't read anything about it in the local newspaper?
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:21 a.m.
Even if you're correct, Chase, it still doesn't make abortion wrong.
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:30 a.m.
Wrong again Bryan. From whom do you think Kermit Gosnell was obtaining referrals ?
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:18 a.m.
Kermit has a very unusual definition of abortion. Planned Parenthood doesn't operate that way. Your argument is one of guilt by association. Not convincing.
Jack Gladney
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:03 a.m.
Good point, Clownfish. Kind of like the shootout in Boston with the Marathon Bombers. Oh wait, there was a local angle...someone's cousin has a friend who lives in Watertown. My bad. I'll have my sister in Philly call the news desk in the morning.
clownfish
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:40 p.m.
Is Kermie being tried in Ann Arbor? Michigan? The same circuit court jurisdiction?
dogpaddle
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:32 p.m.
@Bill Wilson: I'm 100% for not violating free speech rights which is exactly what protesting is. However, advertising for a free ultrasound while giving the name of the place, the exact address and a phone number is not sarcasm. You're right, sarcasm would be protected as it has been for Larry Flynt and Oprah and hopefully Bill Maher when he goes to battle with Donald Trump over his sarcasm. This sign, on the other hand, offers an option, doesn't matter if they're offering a "free gift (sorry, for the redundancy by putting those two words together - one does imply the other)". It would be as if I worked for Angelo's and went and parked (legally) in front of Northside Grille and advertised a better breakfast (I like both places a lot, so please take that as sarcasm to make a point). Now, I could rent a billboard that is in the same block as Northside and that would be unfriendly, but legal. Do you think it's ok if I had a garage sale 3 blocks from you and parked my car in front of your house advertising great stuff 3 blocks away? I think this is a good ordinance. If he were just protesting, and not advertising, let him stay, up to 48 hours, of course (see other ordinance).
martini man
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:27 p.m.
Liberals keep stating that abortion is legal, so there isn't anything wrong with it .Killing millions of children over the years is ok, just as long as the law says you can do it . I am pretty certain that slavery was once perfectly legal. Rewards were even offered for the return of runaway slaves . I doubt if many liberals today would feel that the slavery law was just. BUT they feel killing these children is perfectly fine. Just trying to draw an analogy about how certain people feel about things that the govt has deemed "Legal ".
UpperDecker
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 4:07 p.m.
lol @ a teaspoon of goo. That is classic.
mpope
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:17 a.m.
harpua, a teaspoon of goo is what you once were. and you were still you. a2cents, what an interesting little endeavor! to what end would such a poll be taken, one wonders. state your hypothesis.
A2centsworth
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:46 a.m.
anti-abortionists just wish to subjugate women. I find it interesting how some people think because their religion puts restrictions on them, that everyone else has to agree and go along with their beliefs. Last time I checked I have the legal right to choose my own beliefs, and abortion is legal. I would like to take a poll and see how many children these protestors have.
harpua
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:41 p.m.
a teaspoon of goo is not a child .....have another martini .
clownfish
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:39 p.m.
Again, if you are aware of any facility in which children are being murdered, you need to move away from the keyboard immediately and call the authorities! After that, perhaps a dictionary of scientific terms would be a good purchase.
Bryan Ellinger
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:53 p.m.
Call zygotes and fetuses children all you want, it doesn't make it so. No child is killed by abortion. Drone strikes on the other hand... The pro-abortion stance you've portrayed is a strawman. No one is claiming that abortion is okay because it's legal. It's legal because it's okay.
heresmine
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:23 p.m.
"The code section in question is found at Title X, Chapter 126, section 10:60(3), which prohibits the parking of a vehicle on a public street for the principle purpose of displaying advertising. The ordinance does not define or describe what might be considered advertising, insofar as drawing a distinction between a bumper sticker or some other medium which might constitute an advertisement." This is why the city will lose. The ordinance is too vague. Without a definition of what constitutes "advertising", the defendants will prevail because of a technicality. One other comment, "....parked on a public street........ for more than a year..."? Seriously? I doubt it very much. If that's the case, the car should have been towed months ago. I think this could have been expressed better as I doubt he left the car there unattended, except when protesting, for more than a year. -:)
ThinkingOne
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:10 p.m.
Dave I am not a lawyer but even I can see that you may have huge holes in these 2 situations. Is the truck on a city street or private property? Not parked in street = not applicable If the VW is driving around, it is obviously not parked. Not parked in street = not applicable.
Dave
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:24 p.m.
On Stadium there is a truck advertising the mattress store. The VW dealer has ads on Beetles that drive around. This ordinance has no legs.
Billy
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:40 p.m.
"This is why the city will lose. The ordinance is too vague. Without a definition of what constitutes "advertising", the defendants will prevail because of a technicality." You don't spend much time looking over legal cases do you? Those reasons aren't even remotely valid for upholding the plaintiff's claims. This suit will be dismissed, and the city will be able to seek compensation for legal costs most likely.
Nicholas Urfe
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:33 p.m.
Are you a lawyer licensed in the state of Michigan, or do you just play one on the internet?
cornelius McDougenschniefferburgenstein jr. 3 esq.
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:11 p.m.
speaking of selective enforcement AAPD busts exit ramp beggars for violating the city ordinance (NO SOLICITING $ FROM PEOPLE IN A MOTOR VEHICHLE ON ROADWAY)BUT THEY TURN a blind eye to the pioneer high school girls waiving thier car wash signs.why is that chief?
Gill
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:57 p.m.
If the girls were washing the cars in the public right-of-way it would be a problem.
cornelius McDougenschniefferburgenstein jr. 3 esq.
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:05 p.m.
im pro choice ,but i must ask,why dont 50' long aata bus ads dont get ticketed,or cars that are painted bumper to bumper advertising products,bumper stickers for that matter.if one didnt know better one might think aapd is applying SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT!
Gill
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:59 p.m.
Elizabeth is correct, the moving vehicles are exempted. Ever see those billboard trucks driving around on football days?
Elizabeth
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:30 p.m.
from the article: "Ann Arbor's City Code states that a person is not allowed to park a vehicle on a city roadway for the principal purpose of displaying advertising." AATA bus do not park in the roadway for the principal purpose of displaying advertising. I'm pretty sure their principal purpose is to drive people around.
snapshot
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:57 p.m.
Another frivilous lawedsuit clogging up the courts. Religion seems to breed an arrogance of moral superiority that can can be used to justify behaviors of all kinds.
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:07 a.m.
Funny how Chase falsely attributes religiosity to humanism, and in a negative light no less. So zealous defence of the sacred becomes a fault? Cognitive dissonance anyone?
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:22 a.m.
Abortion is a sacrament of those who claim no religion even while they zealously worship their own wants and desires to the point of destroying a life that might interfere with those wants and desires.
Bill Wilson
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:46 p.m.
Count me as a conservative who disagrees: abortion is, and should remain, a personal choice. HOWEVER... this person was being harassed, and I hope he is successful in his lawsuit.
A2centsworth
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:52 a.m.
count me in as someone who has had to walk through these people and their signs to get medical care. Ticket them and make them go away as they are infringing on my rights just by being there and annoying me. They do not just sit their quietly. They yell out all sorts of religious jargon to passerbys. Before you comment, take a ride there and try to walk into the building without them trying to shove their religious pamphlets at you, and yell prayers in your face.
Silly Sally
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:16 p.m.
Count me as a conservative who agrees, abortion is murder, but this was advertising, I hope that he is successful in his lawsuit, but I think that he has a weak hand.
leaguebus
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:32 p.m.
I once asked the driver of the billboard truck that frequently drives around downtown why I never saw it parked. He told me that most cities have an ordinance about that does not let them park. After reading this article, I don't see how these scofflaws can win their suit. If I wanted to make Mr Dombrowolski not to be there, I would just make those spaces no parking, or 30 minutes only.
Ed Kimball
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:26 a.m.
Free speech, yes. Free advertising, no. He had two other signs in his car that did not advertise and for which he was not ticketed.
Bill Wilson
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:50 p.m.
These 'scofflaws' do not have the right of free speech? I'm a conservative who disagrees with them, but I want dialogue, not communism.
David Cahill
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:12 p.m.
Another baseless lawsuit that will be an easy win for the City.
Brad
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:05 a.m.
Moderator person - my comment is egregiously out of context since you deleted the comment after David Cahill's. Help! It makes it look like I'm responding to Mr. Cahill which was not the case at all.
Brad
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:23 p.m.
So then when an extremist like Mr. Dobrowolski is against something, there's merit to it? I think that's what you just said.
Jaime Magiera
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:01 p.m.
Commenters just can't seem to stick to the issues. This not about your right to protest an abortion It's not about your right to have an abortion. It's simply about advertising. The man has been able to continue protesting without the particular sign. So, clearly his free speech rights are not being violated. The city will successfully fight this and we can all get back to things that matter.
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:19 a.m.
That an ultrasound is available without charge is a compelling fact to his position and speech that women should have access to more information before making a choice. THIS IS NOT A CASE ABOUT ADVERTISING - how many of you will re-appear and admit error when the court finds the city over-reached, since he is not in fact selling anything?
Bill Wilson
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:52 p.m.
Jaime, Your post makes NO sense. This man has only the power of ideas: he cannot enforce them.
Anonymous
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:52 p.m.
This guy is just looking for more free advertising and attention. Thank you Ann Arbor.com for giving it to him! Stop covering media seekers!
pbehjatnia
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:34 p.m.
Mr. Dombrowski, Hands off my uterus. Abortion does not hurt women. Unplanned and unwanted and dangerous pregnancies do. Until you can become pregnant I don't care what your opinion is. You violated the ordinance and you knew that when you did it. Pay up and shut up.
A2centsworth
Thu, Apr 25, 2013 : 11:33 p.m.
All I am saying is religious beliefs are no substitutes for the law of this country. People can believe whatever they like, but that does not mean their personal religious beliefs trumps everyone elses, including the laws of the USA.
jcj
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:46 p.m.
A2 Nice job of informing us that we no longer have the right to express our opinion. Especially if it is different than yours. Sounds like you are living in the 19th century, they used to hang people with different opinions.
mpope
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:08 a.m.
bryon redefines human life. a very un-nice job.
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:58 a.m.
Chase redefines the meaning of viable. Nice job, bro.
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:16 a.m.
Nice A2. Many elderly, handicapped and diseased are not any more viable than a pre-mature baby, but they and that pre-maturely born child are all afforded protection under the law of the United States and all were not afforded such protection under regimes like Nazi Germany.
A2centsworth
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1 a.m.
The fetus is not viable outside the body, therefore it cannot be considered a person. Religious beliefs, not scientific fact are what most pro-lifers use as their proof of life. Since not everyone holds the same religious beliefs, please keep your pro-life opinion to yourself as the laws are clear regarding abortions, and since in this country there is suppose to be a division between church and state, any woman is within her rights to seek an abortion if she desires. Instead of standing around with signs, and blocking roads with their cars, who dont these people do something productive for the homeless children already in this world. Oh yea, that would require actual caring for people, not just promoting their personal agenda.
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:50 a.m.
Michigan Man appears to be saying that most men do care about women's uteruses, since if they could care less, then they must care to a degree that could be lessened. My suspicion is that this pet-peeve post of mine will not meet well with the moderators, but it feels good to write anyway.
Michigan Man
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:57 p.m.
Most men could care less about a woman's uterus!
jcj
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9 p.m.
"Abortion does not hurt women." I suppose ti does not hurt the fetus either.
bobr
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:29 p.m.
It's not worth the use of public resources to give fringe groups a platform. Next time let the car alone and tikcet something else.
Basic Bob
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:44 p.m.
thanks for the welcome sanity break. we now return to baby denying.
David Muzzatti
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:24 p.m.
The tendency in today's New World Order to emancipate itself from God's laws by denying His existence is a charted course that must be reversed. Humanity's increasingly atheistic worldview is leading societies down a path that increasingly disrespects the dignity of human life. As a gift from God, every human life is sacred, from conception to natural death.
clownfish
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:06 p.m.
They had it right 2000 years ago. We should be allowed to own slaves. Bats ARE birds. All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. Pi should =3, not 3.14... There was supposed to be a roof over the world. The Earth came first, then the sun.
mpope
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:05 a.m.
welcome to 'outcomes 101', a necessary instruction intended to speak truth into the pro-fetal-death manifesto. miscarriage (or spontaneous abortion) intentional abortion dead babies. same difference? grandma died grandma was shot in the head and died. dead grandma. same difference? this WILL be on the test.
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:13 a.m.
The negative voter score to your comment is a testament to the reprobate minds of those who read this site. Paul had it right 2000 years ago.
Susanne Brace
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:10 a.m.
What is a natural death?
A2centsworth
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:08 a.m.
David, your religious beliefs are yours, not everyone elses. Not everyone believes as you do. What makes one man think he can speak for all? What makes one persons' God better than another? What makes a person think his or her religion is the "correct" system of belief? Ego.
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1 a.m.
It's safe to say that Stalin was an atheist, Are You Serious, but he was just as irrational as any of the faithful.
clownfish
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:36 p.m.
So, a Caliphate would be in order?
Are you serious?
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:16 p.m.
Just curious David - do you approve of the death penalty? Also as far as I know all the societies that murder and kill innocent people in wars are not atheistic. Do you know of any atheist dictators?
oldguy
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:07 p.m.
Which god is that David ? And why are so many of your god`s gift`s destroyed in utero by nature (which god supposably creaated) or born with cancer, deformities, and other extreme defects? And what is "natural death" these days? Hooked up to every non-natural machine that the medical field has created for prolonging death. Is that a natural death?
Bryan Ellinger
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:19 p.m.
It would be great if you were right about "today's New World Order," but it seems that we are going to be stuck with the faithful butting into other people's business for a long time to come. In every state we have theocrats holding public office trying to impose their archaic worldview on others. If this biblical god (that's the one you're referring to, not Zeus or Mithra, right?) cares so much about zygotes, then why does the female body for which "he" is credited shed so many zygotes as a matter of course? It's way more dead "babies" than Planned Parenthood could ever manage.
Anonymous
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:53 p.m.
Prove his existence and then maybe you can talk.
Amy Biolchini
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:09 p.m.
To those that have brought up the issue bumper stickers, I asked the City of Ann Arbor earlier today about the code in question and how bumper stickers relate. Here's the response: "The code section in question is found at Title X, Chapter 126, section 10:60(3), which prohibits the parking of a vehicle on a public street for the principle purpose of displaying advertising. The ordinance does not define or describe what might be considered advertising, insofar as drawing a distinction between a bumper sticker or some other medium which might constitute an advertisement."
Ed Kimball
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:23 a.m.
@Silly Sally: I guess we'll find out if it's legal, if this case gets to court.
Silly Sally
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:12 p.m.
Just because it is an Ann Arbor law, does not necessarily mean that it is legal. Cross-walk laws?
Bill Wilson
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:58 p.m.
Amy, The sign was obvious sarcasm, and protected free speech. I disagree with him, but it's barbaric to try to silence him.
TruthMan
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:54 p.m.
Mr. Dobrowolski ... I have to wonder how many of these unborn children you have committed to adopt and raise and pay for for the next 18 years, and how many more you are willing to adopt. While I respect your right to your opinion, I must ask ... if your commitment to this isssue is so strong, why don't you do something positive like adopting a few or supporting a few of the 5,000 or more unwanted children that are currently in the Michigan welfare system, instead of petitioning for more children in an already very difficult world.
RuralMom
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:04 p.m.
Popcornmom, if Mr. Dobrowolski's time for this long term protesting hobby is proof he hasn't adopted enough unwanted children to really be helping his cause!
A2centsworth
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:12 a.m.
Thank you TruthMan. Your point is well made. To commit to protesting, does not fix the problem. It only fulfills the Ego.
oldguy
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:01 p.m.
He has adopted zero..... and his group is not interested in real, live, human being children that are in foster care... they only push adoption as part of their anti-abortion agenda
Anonymous
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:55 p.m.
I know that facts, he has none of the little darlings he so vehemently protests. He likes the attention and bantering.
mpope
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:49 p.m.
dead is better than difficult. pro-fetal-death credo at its predictable best. TruthMan, if you knew how many person-hours, money, donations, tutoring, grocery-shopping, transportation miles, apartment and job finding hours THIS COMMUNITY ALONE gives in pro-human-life and pro-family advocacy you'd re-frame your question. instead, you'd be asking: where can i donate? how can i help? but you prefer to ask what (you seem to think) are the tough questions of your pro-fetal-death ideology. ok, then.
popcornmom
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:23 p.m.
How do you know Mr. Dobrowolski isn't already doing these things? Your comment has no merit unless you know the facts.
dogpaddle
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:53 p.m.
This seems pretty simple to me and no tax dollars should go to waste on this going anywhere legally. I don't know any jurisdiction that would allow you to advertise a product or service (in this case a service - free ultra sound) without renting or owning that space somehow (so billboard companies rent their space to advertisers and they either own the land or rent it from the property owner and so it goes). So as I see it, the city is in their right to have an ordinance against the purpose of parking a car for the sole purpose of advertising. No matter how you see it, free or not, advertising for a service is advertising. Had this protester's signage just been about protesting freedom of choice without advertising a service, the city would be on shaky ground with regard to violating free speech. Without this wise ordinance, we could all go park our cars anywhere we want to advertise anything we want to sell. It would give a whole new meaning to prime parking spaces.
DJBudSonic
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:51 p.m.
This case doesn't have much merit in my opinion, as it seems to be a violation of the sign ordinance, which is not protected speech. However, should it be heard, we will finally get to read a written opinion from our City Attorney. For that alone it is worth the lawsuit.
UpperDecker
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:50 p.m.
Dombrowski needs to get a life...why would anyone choose to waste their free time holding signs of dead babies.
UpperDecker
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 4:01 p.m.
First off Mpope, babies dead or alive cannot hold up a sign of dead babies. Second off I was implying dombrowski is in fact wasting his life by protesting constantly. As for Mr. Ingersoll, no offense but perhaps your family member should stop by planned parenthood some time and get on the pill as to avoid any further abortions. If not hey, who cares it is her CHOICE.
mpope
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:53 a.m.
'Dombrowski needs to get a life...why would anyone choose to waste their free time holding signs of dead babies.' @Chase Ingersol, I'm so sorry for your family's losses. Note how UDecker's comment couldn't BE more pro-human-life! He writes, "Dombrowski needs to get a life..." But Dombrowlski already HAS a life. he's alive. then UDecker asks, ".why would anyone choose to waste their free time holding signs of dead babies." Because he HAS a life! and because dead babies can't hold signs and advocate for themselves. !!!!! because the dead babies have already been *wasted. * someone cares that they are gone. someone witnesses to their death. as a pro-human-life advocacy, it's brilliant! as a pro-fetal-death apologetic, can you believe the straight-up, hard-core numb-skullery of the thing???
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:10 a.m.
As someone who has lost 3 nieces and nephews to abortion, and witnessed the emotional repercussions on their mother and extended family, I have to question the humanity of someone who would make your statement.
Silly Sally
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:10 p.m.
Where is Andrew Shirvell?
mpope
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:40 p.m.
nicely played!!! pro-human-life advocacy!!! ... ... (even if it was inadvertent.)
Brad
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:48 p.m.
How long until the More Law Center joins in?
djm12652
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:47 p.m.
So, anyone with say....a Running Fit bumper sticker is in violation of the Law?
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:09 a.m.
Interesting point. Interesting slippery slope.
cornelius McDougenschniefferburgenstein jr. 3 esq.
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:32 p.m.
? amy how big can a bumper sticker be?i thought i once saw a "bumper sticker stuck on a car in a place other than bumper.
Amy Biolchini
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:10 p.m.
Good question. Per the city's code, and as DJBudSonic has stated, bumper stickers are not considered to be in violation of the law.
DJBudSonic
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:54 p.m.
No, only if they park their be-stickered vehicle on a public street for the expressed purpose of advertising, however poorly, for Running Fit.
fjord
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:41 p.m.
There is no Constitutional issue here. Free speech rights are not absolute — there have always been reasonable restrictions, such as the one in the Ann Arbor city code. It shouldn't take much effort for the city's attorneys to knock this one down. Hopefully the zealots will continue to push it up through the appeals process, costing them huge amounts of money for nothing.
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:08 a.m.
Wrong. It is going to cost your city and you, it's tax payers.
dsponini
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:41 p.m.
I always flip all four of those protestors the bird when they are standing out their with their dead baby signs. I see the same four people, 3 men and one woman. All over the age of 55. Don't like abortions, don't have one....and quit forcing your morality on those women who do decide to have one.
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:07 a.m.
Shame on you. They are on the side of the angels and those that bless them are blessed.
clownfish
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:36 p.m.
How about free medical services for each child until age 21? That might begin an engaged conversation with a person facing a very difficult decision.
clownfish
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:58 p.m.
JBK, as the procedure is taking place INSIDE the woman, I am sure she knows more about it than you. As I am sure she knows her life situation better than you.
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 3:32 a.m.
JBK has a good idea, but what about a dramatic soundtrack? Isn't it essential to an exciting viewing experience to have a rockin' soundtrack? This should be standard protocol for all invasive procedures. How gratifying it would've been to have had my tonsillectomy framed against some serious John Williams, or Danny Elfman.
JBK
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:25 a.m.
How about mounting a 60 inch high def on the wall so the woman can watch the operation? She can watch the tool go betweeen her legs and then she can look up as the the baby's head is snapped and sucked into theis vacuum......... just sayin.
jcj
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:23 p.m.
Most people would take offense to being called a child at 20 or 21!
Homeland Conspiracy
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:35 p.m.
As a man it's none of my business.
Silly Sally
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:22 p.m.
Byran - Planned Parenthood doesn't induce labor and snip. Perhaps, they just reach deeper into a woman's womb to do the dirty deed, cutting the baby up and taking it out in pieces.
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:24 a.m.
Chase, Planned Parenthood doesn't induce labor and snip. Your example is simply an inflammatory, guilt-by-association logical fallacy. Nice try, though.
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:06 a.m.
So it's none of your business if babies born alive are having their necks snipped in Philadelphia while the abortion Dr. laughs about them being big enough to walk themselves to the bus stop.
Silly Sally
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:08 p.m.
As a non gun-owner, are guns none of your business? As a non-slave owner, would slavery be none of your business? If you say a mother, or father harming a child, is it none of your business? What kind of a "man" are you?
Gill
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:25 p.m.
@mpope, Are you saying emasculated males are not human people?
jcj
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:55 p.m.
"As a man it's none of my business." Does that mean you don't think men should support abortion either? I doubt it! Does that mean as a man it is none of your business when a child in molested? If it is non of a mans business why did only men rule on Roe vs Wade?
mpope
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:37 p.m.
if you were an emasculated man, it would be none of your business because the emasculated man ensures his own ineptitude. but as a human person, it's very much your business. fjord is grossly mistaken when s/he asserts that men comprise most of the ranks or pro-human-life advocacy. eschew the gender war underpinnings.
fjord
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:45 p.m.
It's true that it's none of your business what a woman does with her body, but you can still support abortion rights. Men make up most of the ranks of those fighting against abortion; therefore men on the other side should step forward to support a woman's right to choose.
Jaime
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:34 p.m.
@Napoleon - Legislation bars Planned Parenthood from using federal dollars for abortion services. They can only be used for family planning services. You should get your facts from someplace other than Fox News. (and I use the term news very loosely when it come to Fox)
clownfish
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:55 p.m.
Chase, why don't you tell us about Ms Sanger? Did she hold views that we, today, would disagree with? Sure. That is true of a lot of people and institutions, such as The Church, the Boy Scouts, Thomas Jefferson, G. Washington and John Calvin. I like this quote from PP regarding some of Sangers beliefs- "Planned Parenthood Federation of America finds these views objectionable and outmoded. Nevertheless, anti-family planning activists continue to attack Sanger, who has been dead for nearly 40 years, because she is an easier target than the unassailable reputation of PPFA and the contemporary family planning movement."
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:51 a.m.
You're right about that Chase.
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:04 a.m.
WRONG: all dollars are "FUNGIBLE". And if you really cared about facts, you would go right to M. Sanger herself and what she said/wrote about the need for starting an organization like Planned Parenthood.
leezee
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:31 p.m.
Here is the thing I always wonder about......why are there, pretty much, always only men protesting Planned Parenthood on Huron Parkway? That's all I ever see. Funny how the gender that can't even get pregnant speaks out the loudest against abortion. Wonder how different it would be if the shoe was on the other foot.
KateT
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:16 a.m.
Abortion benefits men in that since they tend to earn more than women, they don't have to pay child support.
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:01 a.m.
Go talk to some men who have lost siblings, children, nieces, nephews and grandchildren to the abortion mills. I've lost three nieces and nephews that I know about, and there will always be an empty place where they should have been. Men protest. What would YOU have have them do. After Columbine there was a psychologist that wrote, "boys who don't cry tears, cry bullets." I can think of any number of less appropriate outlets for the men who protest. Thank God they have such an outlet rather than violent outbursts. But many of you would take away that legal outlet.
Billy
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:34 p.m.
" on strong, articulate, intelligent, educated FEMALE pro-life advocates." That doesn't exist....and GENDER has nothing to do with the reason...
cornelius McDougenschniefferburgenstein jr. 3 esq.
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:24 p.m.
im a cant get pregnant gender (thats why i typicly shut up on this topic,god bless)
Dog Guy
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:05 p.m.
And so very many abortion supporters are men. What benefits can men derive individually or collectively from abortion?
Silly Sally
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:05 p.m.
Oh, you are so silly, and so wrong! Women are against murder, too.
mpope
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:26 p.m.
funny how you never saw me or my friends there. what IS funnier still, is how the news media would rather eat bird droppings than to report on strong, articulate, intelligent, educated FEMALE pro-life advocates. i know plenty of them. they live. they breathe. they earn incomes. and they advocate for women and for pre-born human lives. but men are human, too. they most definitely have a right to advocate for human lives.
Barzoom
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:21 p.m.
Protesting means taking the consequences of your actions, not crying about them later. One asks how this person can be taken seriously.
craigjjs
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:56 p.m.
I do not take this protester seriously. I do take seriously the possibility that the police used an obscure, anti-advertising law to, at best, discourage a protester. From the article, it sounds like the Planned Parenthood people were more reasonable than the police (or whoever made the decision to twice ticket the protester).
Amy Biolchini
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:16 p.m.
According to Robert Muise, Paul Dobrowolski's lawyer, Paul has continued to protest outside of the Planned Parenthood location in Ann Arbor using signs in his car -- just without the sign that says "Free Ultrasounds, Family Life Services" etc. The "Free Ultrasounds" sign was the only sign the City raised an issue with. Do you think the "Free Ultrasounds" sign constitutes as an advertisement? Dobrowolski has no connection to the Family Life Services clinic and is a pro-life advocate.
Steve
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 7:19 p.m.
It may, and if that's what the public thinks then I'll be sure to call the police and report every time I see a group of girl scouts selling cookies out of the minivan and have signs up to promote sales. Can't have it both ways. If you block this one guy having one small sign up in his car, then we need to block all people that have anything advertised inside of cars.
Ed Kimball
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 2:22 a.m.
@mpope: many people see the difference between a fetus and a "live human baby", even if you don't.
kejamder
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 10:54 p.m.
@mpope, i imagine it would do very little to PP's income: FY2010: "clinic revenue totaling $2 million, grants and donations of $190 million, investment income of $2 million, and $7 million other income"
mpope
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:20 p.m.
a bully at best.... so much ad hominem assault. so little time. but let's do take time for one more. this: 'Yes I do and some unknowing female, may take him up on that offer and not get what they are expecting medically speaking of course!' yes. imagine not expecting to see a live human baby growing inside one's womb, and then-- by mistake-- seeing that is precisely who is growing there-- a live, human baby. imagine what that INFORMATION could do to a supposedly already-informed consent. imagine what that kind of information could do to Planned Parenthood's income.
craigjjs
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:51 p.m.
I strongly support the right to choose and believe this protester, like many of his ilk, is a bully at best. That said, I am not at all comfortable with the use of this ordinance in this situation. It would seem that the purpose of the law is to prevent a business from parking a car on the street all day merely as a platform for advertisements (presumably preventing many other businesses from doing the same and clogging up the roads). It seems that here, however, the demonstrator was actually at the location actively protesting while the car was parked. It appears that someone complained and the police used the ordinance in response to that complaint and to discourage the protester. The situation might satisfy the ordinance, but I am not sure it satisfies the Constitution. Even a content neutral law can be unconstitutional if it is selectively enforced to stifle unwelcome speech. As unpleasant as it might seem, I would quickly settle this matter and avoid the risk of paying the City's and the plaintiff's attorneys' fees if the City loses. Even if the City wins, how much money is it worth to defend the use of this anti-sign ordnance? Does it really benefit anyone?
Macabre Sunset
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:49 p.m.
The better question is whether the Supreme Court will allow jurisdictions to distinguish between commercial speech and other speech. Any time they set up a test, it can't be followed consistently. Yet without the restrictions, we'd have signs advertising all sorts of junk packing every public right of way. We allow businesses to have signs on their trucks. Those trucks are often parked in highly visible places because of that specific exception. While I think Dobrowolski is not a good or moral person, I think he wins this case, but hopefully the courts limit damages to the actual cost of the fines, which seems reasonable.
Jaime
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:36 p.m.
Whether or not he has a connection is irrelevant. He is advertising a service.
RuralMom
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:32 p.m.
"Do you think the "Free Ultrasounds" sign constitutes as an advertisement? Dobrowolski has no connection to the Family Life Services clinic and is a pro-life advocate." Yes I do and some unknowing female, may take him up on that offer and not get what they are expecting medically speaking of course!
goosenews
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:23 p.m.
Yes. No connection other than he advertises their services.
Momentum
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:16 p.m.
Not sure what those pro lifers expect - they should stay out of other peoples business - to file a law suite - how sad and unnecessary is that -
jcj
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:25 p.m.
Momentum I would hope you are not against guns because you shouldn't be. If you are against guns stay out of my business.
Peter
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9 p.m.
There's a big difference between saying 'they shouldn't do that' and 'they shouldn't have the right to do that.' You're arguing against the second when somebody said the first.
jcj
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:47 p.m.
Please explain how the pro lifers do not have a right to protest! Do you also say that abortion rights advocates have no right to protest? What country were you raised in?
napoleon
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:12 p.m.
He has the absolute right to do this, in my opinion, and I am glad there is action being taken. Planned Parenthood performed over 300,000 abortions last year and profited 87 million dollars yet they receive 500 million dollars a year in federal funding (taxpayers money) and have over 1 billion dollars in assets. They are not about womens rights! They are about the legal murder of babies for profit! On Thursday, Planned Parenthood is having their annual fundraiser and Barack Obama is the keynote speaker...how disgusting! If his speech last 1 hour, more than 34 babies will be murdered during that hour.
sh1
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:28 a.m.
Less than 5% of what PP spends is on abortion. The rest is medical services for women. Your numbers are warped.
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:56 a.m.
Thank you for citing facts that will be subjected to ridiculous Replies of the Anonymous.
clownfish
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:33 p.m.
Yes, MPOPE, I am aware of US history. Do you have a point?
mpope
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:12 p.m.
clownfish, are you unaware that in our history, the US had enshrined several enduring institutions based on brutal civil rights abuses? or is that clownfish suit a permanent fixture?
bobslowson
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:09 p.m.
Zygotes aren't "babies"
clownfish
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:22 p.m.
If you are aware of babies being killed, you should alert the authorities, as that would be illegal.
America
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:08 p.m.
Wow! Ticketed for not leaning far enough left to be in Ann Arbor. I shouldn't be surprised. Pro-lifers are always chased away while the abortion factory merrily hums along.
clownfish
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:45 p.m.
That is what I thought, a claim with no merit. So often the case these days, so often coming from those with Bibles in their hands, Bibles that tell them not to spread rumor, lies and gossip.
Jack Gladney
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 11:08 p.m.
@Ignatz Jeff Dahmer's meals contained less than 2% humans. What's your point?
CONCERNED CITIZEN
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8 p.m.
America you are completely right, more morals in this country would definitely help. Not everything is a gray area......there should be black and white decisions in everyones life...not everything is ok!
Ignatz
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:53 p.m.
So-called America, 3% of Planned Parenthood's services are abortions. Hardly a "factory".
Jaime
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:26 p.m.
I have never hear of a peaceful abortion protester being chased away from a public area. Yet there are many states putting into place legislation to chase away (close down) clinics. The right of a woman to obtain an abortion was affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States.
clownfish
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:20 p.m.
Do you evidence to support your claim that "Pro-lifers are always chased away"? I see them around the area on a regular basis, I have never seen them chased away. Mr Dobrowolski was not chased away.Apparently, according the the lawsuit, he has been coming to the area for over a year. PP has a policy to not engage with or "chase away" protesters. Upon what do you base your claim?
Momentum
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:12 p.m.
they should not be there in the first place leave these people alone
observer
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 6:51 p.m.
just an attempt to get paid by the city or clog up the courts.....
JBK
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 1:15 a.m.
Trust me on this. He will win. the only question is how much. If it is 7 figures which is what I would do, then the City taxpayer will have to pony up for the poor decisions by the Mayor and Council. As a resident of Ann Arbor, I am caught in the middle. I want this guy to win his case, BUT if he ends up getting some ludicrous amount, then the City's insurance policy may or may not have to pay for it. If they do NOT, then the city taxpayer is on the hook for it..................
RuralMom
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 6:51 p.m.
Mr. Paul Dobrowolski if you do not wish to have an abortion, then you should not have one! However your rights end, when they impede on others rights. Advertising for free ultra sounds, is akin to practicing medicine without a license.
emilyangel25
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 8:45 p.m.
If everyone's rights ended when they impede on other people's rights, then nobody would have any rights. Those who have the right not to get lung cancer impede the rights of those who want to smoke. Those who don't want prayer in schools impede the religious freedom of others.....That is a circular argument. Maybe if people focused on others and gave grace instead of only thinking of ME ME ME all the time, we wouldn't have this problem. Mr. Dobrowolski believes that the unborn have rights too. Who is going to speak for them? You are just like all of the other selfish people and are only thinking of your rights. Try shifting your focus to others for a change and giving grace even when you do not agree with them. God bless you and everyone who is involved in this discussion.
Chase Ingersoll
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 12:53 a.m.
I really hope for your sake that this is an attempt at hurmor/irony. 1. he's not impeding anyone's rights - his are being impeded. 2. Advertising free ultra sounds, is............this is completely irrational And I wonder - would you have thought about how you sounded above if you were required to use your real name?
Jack Gladney
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:31 p.m.
@Gill Is it a violation of some law to thermally damage a fetus? It's not like a lump of flesh is human or anything. It would be different matter if you were talking about a person or someone's dog.
Gill
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 9:14 p.m.
@jcj Actually, they should have a licensed ultrasound technician, as improper use can cause thermal damage to the fetus.
jcj
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:44 p.m.
"Advertising for free ultra sounds, is akin to practicing medicine without a license." Didn't give that statement a lot of thought I suspect. I suspect you have no problem with unlicensed abortions.
mpope
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 8:04 p.m.
every pro-abort/ pro-fetal-death argument leads to the same place: untenable, unsustainable contentions and comparisons. ruralmom's 'impeding rights' contention is clear demonstration of this.
Angry Moderate
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 6:54 p.m.
Posting a sign is not "practicing medicine." Regardless, he was given a ticket, not charged with practicing medicine without a license.
Cory C
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 6:50 p.m.
You can say what you want to say, this much is true. But you can't advertise for services. Not even free ones. That's overstepping it. That'd be like me parking an ice cream truck outside of dairy queen.
Steve
Wed, Apr 24, 2013 : 7:06 p.m.
He should just write it directly on his car then, instead of on a sign. That would be legal, I see all kinds of trucks parked on streets that say "ACME Landscaping" or "Plumbing services" or dealership cars, etc. Frustrating at times, but hey, free speech I guess.
Jaime
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:21 p.m.
@Justin, Laws against advertising legally exist in may places and have been upheld by the courts. If the guy wants to put his message on a billboard that's fine. The law may have something to do with distracted driving so maybe you should find out the details of the ordinance.
Justin Altman
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 7:07 p.m.
And why couldn't you do that? If you weren't on Dairy Queen's property, you're not violating their rights, and don't deserve any punishment. Speech is Speech, commercial or otherwise. Besides, why do you want to be left in the dark about other commercial opportunities as a consumer? Wouldn't you want to know, while going to DQ, that you could get similar service at less cost, or better quality, somewhere else? Limits on commercial speech is nothing but protectionism, hurting competition and consumers and benefiting the larger players.
Angry Moderate
Tue, Apr 23, 2013 : 6:53 p.m.
Not really, there is greater protection for political and religious speech than commercial business.