Man removed from Longview council meetings seeks appeal after federal court dismissal

Jason Still was asked to leave two City Council meetings between April 2022 and June 2023 because he was accused a talking when citizens weren't allowed to, so he sued the city.

featured-image

The Washington Western District Court has dismissed the lawsuit filed by a Longview resident who was removed from multiple Longview City Council meetings in 2022 and 2023. The plaintiff filed an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals at the end of August to reconsider the case and the appeals court added the case to its docket Wednesday. The district court in Tacoma ruled Aug.

2 that plaintiff Jason Still had not shown significant facts that the city committed misconduct or violated his First Amendment and Fourth Amendment rights when they stopped him from verbally interrupting council meetings. District Court Judge Benjamin Settle ruled in favor of the city's motion to dismiss the case with prejudice, meaning Still would not be able to file a new claim. But on Monday, Still completed a mediation questionnaire, the first step in determining how the case will move through the appeals court.



During council meetings in April and May 2022, Still interrupted then-Mayor MaryAlice Wallis to discuss how the city doesn't allow follow-ups to constituent comments. Wallis said Still was not permitted to speak at that point in the meeting and asked him to stop interrupting or leave. He was asked to leave the April meeting.

Jason Still At the meeting in June 2023, Still was asked to stop talking to other people in the audience during a council discussion. Still got into a back-and-forth with Wallis and then-councilmember Hillary Strobel before being escorted out by of the chambers by Longview police. City spokesperson Angela Abel told The Daily News that "due to the possibility of litigation, the city cannot comment on this matter.

" City Council meetings are a limited public forum where the city can enforce broad restrictions on the time, place and manner of public comment but not restrict speech based on opinion. In the ruling, Settle writes that Still had been given "numerous opportunities to speak" during all three meetings, including the constituents' comment section and during the public feedback allowed on other agenda items. "Mayor Wallis and the council did not, however, allow Still to speak when the constituents’ comments period had ended, the council was conducting its own business, and the council was not, at the time, allowing public comment," Settle writes.

Settle's decision states that Still's complaint asserted "broad platitudes from federal caselaw" but did not draw clean lines between the municipal and state rules for public comment periods and the federal First Amendment protections. Still said Washington Western District Court failed to address what he believes are violations of how the city says public comments should be handled. Longview’s city website says citizens “may comment on individual agenda items during any regularly scheduled city council meeting prior to council discussion.

" These comment times are separate from the constituent comment agenda item typically held near the beginning of meetings. "It seems expressly contradictory that by me trying to employ and abide by the instructions that the city publicizes on how to address City Council, that is outside the limits," Still told The Daily News. Still said the interruption at the June meeting was Strobel's fault and everything else was a sincere attempt at speaking on city issues.

Still's lawsuit also accused the city and Longview Police Department of using excessive force to remove him from the June 2023 meeting. The lawsuit states that after Still insisted on watching the council meeting from the hallway outside the room, Capt. Branden McNew eventually escorted him out of the building.

Settle ruled that McNew had reasonable cause to think Still was displaying disorderly conduct and obstruction when he refused to leave the hallway despite being asked multiple times. Settle also writes that Still's claim seemed to confuse the Fourteenth Amendment's due process protections with the Fourth Amendment's protections from unreasonable search and seizure. "McNew reasonably exercised his discretion to not arrest Still and to, instead, 'gently touch his arm and guide him toward the exit,'" Settle writes, quoting a previous city filing.

Still said he is willing to bring the case to the U.S. Supreme Court if he doesn't get a favorable decision from the Ninth Circuit.

Brennen Kauffman is a reporter for The Daily News covering government, with a concentration on Longview and Kelso. Stay up-to-date on the latest in local and national government and political topics with our newsletter. Reporter {{description}} Email notifications are only sent once a day, and only if there are new matching items.

.