Denham Springs, ACLU trade slaps on ‘bird’ display

A holiday light display showing an extended middle finger kept on sparking discord Wednesday even though Sarah Henderson removed the decoration from her roof Monday after a visit from police.

Responding to an American Civil Liberties Union letter complaining about pressure applied by city police, City Attorney Paeton Burkett fired back an email Wednesday.

“I would hate to see this lady re-erect such a display, which causes her such conflict with her neighbors,” Burkett says in the email to the ACLU. “No one wants to be ‘that’ person in a neighborhood.

“In my opinion these actions could cause continuing embarrassment to Ms. Henderson, her friends and family,” Burkett says in the email.

“I would think that sometimes you have to appeal to someone’s moral compass and hope they do the right thing, even if it isn’t illegal per se,” Burkett’s email says.

That brought a terse reply from Marjorie R. Esman, executive director of the ACLU of Louisiana.

“I find your email astonishing,” Esman says to Burkett. “As the city attorney for Denham Springs, it is your job to advise them on the law, not to impose your values on what you would like the law to be.

“My job is to defend the Constitution for all of the people of Louisiana,” Esman says. “The First Amendment is not about what you, or Ms. Henderson’s neighbors, consider to be in good taste.

“Indeed, in a free country it is impermissible for law enforcement to impose standards of taste or majoritarian preferences on those in the minority,” Esman says. “Those are the tactics of a police state, not a free democracy.”

The ACLU reply continues: “I would expect you to enforce the laws, not your own personal preferences. It is up to Ms. Henderson to decide whether she wants to be ‘that’ person in her neighborhood and whether or not she will be embarrassed. The law does not allow the City of Denham Springs to make that decision for her.”

As of late Wednesday afternoon, Henderson said, she hadn’t made a decision on exactly what she will do next.

She hadn’t re-erected the middle-finger display, which she said she initially put up as a comment to neighbors with whom she has had a yearlong disagreement.

Henderson said an ACLU attorney she spoke with Wednesday told her the organization could protect her as far as fighting a citation.

“I’ve thought about it a lot,” Henderson said. “I got my point across.”

She said at the moment, she isn’t inclined to put the lighted finger image back on her roof.

“I am going to put something else up,” Henderson said. “It’s going to be so scrutinized, so it has to be the right thing.”


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (39)


1) Comment by Len2881 - 03/12/2012

I still think that she should just call it a Livingston Parish menorah.

2) Comment by Chucky - 30/11/2012

Got it, sorry for my slow up take, think I will take a nap and hope my reading skills improve.

3) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 30/11/2012

Chucky, they choose cases with ACTUAL civil rights violations; they shouldn’t waste time with markedward's manufactured controversies so he can buy a new bike. Heck, I despise Rush but they were correct in defending him, as well as Fred Phelps and his horrible “protests”.

4) Comment by Chucky - 30/11/2012

What issues did/do have Tea_Slayer - that you would like the ACLU to handle? Top three or five.

5) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 30/11/2012

"The ACLU has refused to come to my defense at least a dozen times, minimum." Hmm, I wonder why???

6) Comment by Chucky - 30/11/2012

www.legis.state.la.us is the home page title 32 will be motor vehicle law.

7) Comment by Chucky - 30/11/2012

You can do a search for - title 14 Louisiana criminal code or go to <www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?folder=88> make sure you are reading current law, or get the book.

8) Comment by HerbF - 30/11/2012

Chucky, where do we find the statutes on the internet?

9) Comment by Chucky - 30/11/2012

I agree MBW and i only bash the ACLU when i disagree with them.

10) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 29/11/2012

Actually, you're wrong. The ACLU has refused to come to my defense at least a dozen times, minimum.

11) Comment by MBW - 29/11/2012

In 2010, the ACLU in Colorado defended a Christian student when a school banned the wearing of religious symbols to school----In 2002, the ACLU of Ohio defended a pastor who was prohibited from protesting against abortion at a parade.-----In 2010, the ACLU of Oregon defended a religious school's right to abstain from playing basketball games on the sabbath. I would urge conservatives to think carefully before attacking the ACLU...they have come to your defense more often than you think.

12) Comment by MBW - 29/11/2012

We need to debunk this idea that the ACLU is a "liberal" organization. The ACLU has a long history of defending religious freedom and free speech (including that of conservatives). Just a couple of examples: http://www.aclufightsforchristians.com/ AND http://aclu- co.org/news/aclu-supports-students-right-of-religious-freedom

13) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 29/11/2012

THANK YOU, Chucky, for being one of the few who has bothered to actually read that oft misquoted statute. Maybe if she put this display on the lawn of a funeral home, well, maybe then.

14) Comment by Chucky - 29/11/2012

OK disturbing the peace will not fly, just re-read the statue.

15) Comment by Chucky - 29/11/2012

Living in a mixed subdivision it would be more like a fire, and I would think the HOA would have something to say. I would think that disturbing the peace would be a good charge, the reason you can flip off an officer is that their peace can not be disturbed.

16) Comment by jedleland - 29/11/2012

maybe just target Target

17) Comment by jedleland - 29/11/2012

that free motorcycle i helped pay for has to be putting some miles on it by now time for a new once for xmas maybe? which major retail precinct will you target for a lawsuit scam this time? i reckon tanger is on to you by now so maybe towne center lots of $$$ there

18) Comment by Bouncer - 29/11/2012

msladyface....."No one has morals." Very, very interesting comment, in that it is sweeping and all-inclusive in its condemnation of others. Of course, you realize that when you say "No one has morals," you are including yourself, too. Right? Oh, of course not. What you mean is that nobody has morals except YOU or that the only acceptable morals are those YOU subscribe to. In my estimation, the smugly righteous superiority displayed by such a mindset makes you more of a problem than the lady with the unorthodox display on her roof.

19) Comment by jedleland - 29/11/2012

a clue for you marchiafava the actual constitution comes AFTER the preamble its the long tricky bit. you only read the easy short bit. and got humiliated again, this time by noel hammat on this very forum that you are so thankful for. maybe take it a page at a time if its too much for you. and new material please. we're all tire of 'land of the free? LOL' and ' when i was a younger man I used to wonder...' dont you have anything fresh for us?

20) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 29/11/2012

I would like to thank the Advocate for allowing this forum. The comments here have helped me understand why our once-great republic isn't.

21) Comment by DMJ - 29/11/2012

The middle finger has no connotations specific to any one group. It's a universal sign for...well...you know. Chucky, to answer your question: no, it's not a crime if it's on your own property. You're well within your rights to put hate speech up on your own roof. Go ahead and do it. You won't get arrested. Of course, you may get a brick through the window. It's your call...

22) Comment by oldschoolromad - 29/11/2012

****Comment Removed for Violation of Terms of Use****

23) Comment by jedleland - 29/11/2012

it is not a crime to light up a noose or put the n word on your roof in big letters or a swastika or a burning cross any other tea party emblem. you cant do it on another persons property for instance hanging a noose on a black persons house or yard or vehicle as that would constitute assualt and/or intimidation directed at a specific person but as it stands no none of those things you mentioned are hate crimes under statute. by the way the aclu also opposes 'hate crime' legislation in all its forms and believes that all laws should be applied equally to all citizens

24) Comment by Chucky - 29/11/2012

It seems that the people who think it is her 'right' to light up the 'bird' are OK as long as it is directed to an individual or family, but would be wrong if it targeted a group such a Homosexuals, Blacks, or any other minority (becomes a hate crime ,and this is not). Is it my 'right' to light up a noose or the n-word on my roof ? Is this not a hate crime ? (comment also posted Most discussed )

25) Comment by NewsReader - 29/11/2012

A real newspaper would have also included the basis of the year long dispute instead of letting us all wonder what they've been bickering about as neighbors.

26) Comment by mrsladyface - 29/11/2012

If the ACLU wants to protect the rights of that immoral, ignorant trash of society, let them. The woman wants to put up something so tasteless, let her. Just makes her look bad. You would think people would have a better sense of moral appropriateness but that's exactly what's wrong with the world today. No one has morals.

27) Comment by jedleland - 29/11/2012

Marchiafava again proving how little he knows about basic constitutional provisions. The aclu is a private non profit and has the ‘right’ to pick and choose who it represents you see that’s what being private is all about. You have no ‘right’ to demand their help anymore than you have a ‘right’ to demand the free help of any lawyer say in case you ever wanted to file a frivolous lawsuit against an outlet mall to make some quick $$$. its amazing you cant understand this. Wait given the quality of your prior posts its not amazing at all you know if you ever read beyond the preamble of the constitution which thanks to noel hammat we know you havent. its amazing what you can actually learn about rights and how they are defined and how they are different from privileges. This is really basic stuff you know If you did you would know you didn’t have the ‘right’ to threaten elected representatives over the phone but they did have the ‘right’ to send you to the mental unit for two weeks to protect you and the community from yourself. Oh wait you did get your day in court didn’t you. You also had that ‘right’ what was the result of your lawsuit? thrown out wasn’t it? Must have been representing yourself. The aclu can choose whatever case it wants, and so can the S court there in the case of appellate cases. there is no provision in the constitution that guarantees you a supreme court hearing. If you ever read article 3 you would know that. Let us know when you make it past the preamble

28) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 29/11/2012

The ACLU is about as useless as the not-so-supreme court. It cherrypicks and chooses the small handful of issues it involves itself with. Just like the not-so-supreme court, you have no right to demand your issue be addressed. Only a very small % "make the cut."

29) Comment by HerbF - 29/11/2012

Marjorie Esman and the ACLU are important assets to our community. They protect OUR rights, and I am very grateful for that. I doubt the display will be replaced, as the point has been made far better than she could ever have hoped. If there is another display, hopefully it will not be controversal.

30) Comment by DMJ - 29/11/2012

“No one wants to be ‘that’ person in a neighborhood." Well...apparently, she does. It's her house, her roof and her freedom of speech. This is why we have the ACLU: to stand up to redneck municipalities who only care about the 1st Amendment when it serves them.

31) Comment by janbrady - 29/11/2012

Gay and lesbian minorities > ABayouBoy

32) Comment by janbrady - 29/11/2012

I thank the baby Jesus everyday for the ACLU. Seriously.

33) Comment by Tally - 29/11/2012

Let her put it up. Such an obvious display makes it easier to see who the tasteless lowlifes are so they can be avoided.

34) Comment by ABayouBoy - 29/11/2012

Common sense would tell anyone that the display was inappropriate. Especially at this time of the year. A Christmas decoration of all things. Who needs the ACLU to protect Ms. Henderson's rights? They would better serve the select few by backing the immoral actions of the gay and lesbian minorities.

35) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 29/11/2012

And Marjorie Esman continues her lies with this statement: "Those are the tactics of a police state (that part is true), not a free democracy." According to the constitution (pre-Obama), our form of government is that of a republic.

36) Comment by Hello Baton Rouge - 29/11/2012

Yes only a select few. The select few of those that come under fire for exercising their rights and have nowhere else to turn, like this woman. How does that make her a liar? The ACLU is not meant to be a pro-bono law firm.

37) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 29/11/2012

Majorie Esman is lying. The ACLU doesn't defend the constitution for ALL Louisianians, only a select few.

38) Comment by Bighug - 29/11/2012

I expect Livingston Parish to dedicate a tax specifically to pay ACLU lawyers in cases lost to them. What a stupid bunch of people running governments in Louisiana. Maybe they will pass a law next that I would be in favor of, such as outlawing the wearing of ties loosened at the collar.

39) Comment by julwood - 29/11/2012

Gives new meaning to "flipping" houses!

40) Comment by dday198 - 29/11/2012

how about hey City Attorney Paeton Burkett this ones for you.