Germantown drops citation for holiday decorations
MEMPHIS, Tenn. — The City of Germantown has dropped a citation against a woman they said violated the city's holiday decorations ordinance.
Alexis Luttrell claimed her First Amendment rights were violated when she received a citation in January to remove skeleton decorations she used for Halloween, then for Christmas.
Luttrell was told the decorations violated Ordinance 11-33, which prohibits residents from placing holiday and seasonal decorations on their property more than 45 days before or 30 days after the intended holiday.
Court records show the charge was listed as nolle pros last week.
Germantown considers getting rid of ordinance at center of skeleton decorations lawsuit
'I'm beyond pleased that I'm no longer on trial for nothing more than decorating my yard in a way that City Hall didn't like,' Luttrell said in a news release from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. 'That these charges were ever brought in the first place was utterly surreal, but I'm glad that they're dead and buried — and my skeletons aren't.'
Luttrell told WREG she purchased a skeleton and a dog skeleton for yard displays throughout the year.
Her lawsuit claims Germantown is dictating how residents celebrate holidays and its decorations ordinance is unconstitutionally vague.
'I want to protect not only my First Amendment rights but those of my community,' said Luttrell. 'It shouldn't be left up to Germantown whether my holiday decor matches their personal taste or preference.'
Germantown resident summoned to court over holiday decor
Complaint for Civil Rights Violations – Luttrell v. City of Germantown TennesseeDownload
According to court documents, Luttrell said that ordinance violates the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment because it is vague and fails to give fair notice to the public and give officials discretion to arbitrarily enforce it according to their own subjective beliefs.
Luttrell said she wanted the court to declare Germantown violated her rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments and wants the city's holiday ordinance thrown out entirely.
The Germantown Board of Aldermen will meet at 6 p.m. on Monday at City Hall to discuss repealing the city's ordinance.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Explainer-Does U.S. law allow Trump to send troops to quell protests?
By Dietrich Knauth President Donald Trump has deployed National Guard troops to California after two days of protests by hundreds of demonstrators against immigration raids, saying that the protests interfered with federal law enforcement and framing them as a possible 'form of rebellion' against the authority of the U.S. government. California Governor Gavin Newsom on Sunday said he had formally requested that the Trump Administration rescind "its unlawful deployment of troops in Los Angeles County" and return them to his command. WHAT LAWS DID TRUMP CITE TO JUSTIFY THE MOVE? Trump cited Title 10 of the U.S. Code, a federal law that outlines the role of the U.S. Armed Forces, in his June 7 order to call members of the California National Guard into federal service. A provision of Title 10 - Section 12406 - allows the president to deploy National Guard units into federal service if the U.S. is invaded, there is a 'rebellion or danger of rebellion' or the president is 'unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.' WHAT ARE NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS ALLOWED TO DO UNDER THE LAW CITED IN TRUMP'S ORDER? An 1878 law, the Posse Comitatus Act, generally forbids the U.S. military, including the National Guard, from taking part in civilian law enforcement. Section 12406 does not override that prohibition, but it allows the troops to protect federal agents who are carrying out law enforcement activity and to protect federal property. For example, National Guard troops cannot arrest protesters, but they could protect U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement who are carrying out arrests. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH? The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to assembly, freedom of speech and the press. Experts have said that Trump's decision to have U.S. troops respond to protests is an ominous sign for how far the president is willing to go to repress political speech and activity that he disagrees with or that criticizes his administration's policies. IS TRUMP'S MOVE SUSCEPTIBLE TO LEGAL CHALLENGES? Four legal experts from both left- and right-leaning advocacy organizations have cast doubt on Trump's use of Title 10 in response to immigration protests calling it inflammatory and reckless, especially without the support of California's Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom, who has said Trump's actions would only escalate tensions. The protests in California do not rise to the level of 'rebellion' and do not prevent the federal government from executing the laws of the United States, experts said. Title 10 also says "orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States," but legal experts said that language might not be an obstacle. Legislative history suggests that those words were likely meant to reflect the norms of how National Guard troops are typically deployed, rather than giving a governor the option to not comply with a president's decision to deploy troops. COULD CALIFORNIA SUE TO CHALLENGE TRUMP'S MOVE? California could file a lawsuit, arguing that deployment of National Guard troops was not justified by Title 10 because there was no 'rebellion' or threat to law enforcement. A lawsuit might take months to resolve, and the outcome would be uncertain. Because the protests may be over before a lawsuit is resolved, the decision to sue might be more of a political question than a legal one, experts said. WHAT OTHER LAWS COULD TRUMP INVOKE TO DIRECT THE NATIONAL GUARD OR OTHER U.S MILITARY TROOPS? Trump could take a more far-reaching step by invoking the Insurrection Act of 1792, which would allow troops to directly participate in civilian law enforcement, for which there is little recent precedent. Casting protests as an 'insurrection' that requires the deployment of troops against U.S. citizens would be riskier legal territory, one legal expert said, in part because mostly peaceful protests and minor incidents aren't the sort of thing that the Insurrection Act were designed to address. The Insurrection Act has been used by past presidents to deploy troops within the U.S. in response to crises like the 1794 Whiskey Rebellion and the rise of the Ku Klux Klan in the immediate aftermath of the American Civil War. The law was last invoked by President George H.W. Bush in 1992, when the governor of California requested military aid to suppress unrest in Los Angeles following the Rodney King trial. But, the last time a president deployed the National Guard in a state without a request from that state's governor was 1965, when President Lyndon Johnson sent troops to protect civil rights demonstrators in Montgomery, Alabama.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
On the Record: Federal funding cuts threaten 1/3 of WTVP budget
PEORIA, Ill. (WMBD) — Local PBS affiliate stations like WTVP are sounding the alarm for their future after the Trump administration formally requested Congress to claw back funding for the next two years. WTVP President and CEO Jenn Gordon joined 'On the Record' and said the cuts will have a devastating impact on her station, which has just recovered from a financial situation of its own. 'So we're looking at an impact of about a third of our annual funding being immediately cut, if this rescission package goes through. So a lot is at stake here. More than 1.3 million people have already contacted Congress to voice their support [for public media],' she said. Gordon emphasized that public media differs from commercial media in that it's a private-public partnership. 'We're nonprofit organizations that rely in part on federal support to offer commercial-free programming to everyone. It was set up originally to receive some taxpayer dollars to get the ball rolling, but then also all of our local stations, we do quite a bit of fundraising to supplement that,' said Gordon. That federal funding could disappear in less than two months. The Trump administration, on Tuesday, sent Congress a rescission package, formally requesting the return of $1.1 billion already allocated for fiscal years 2026 and 2027 to fund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. That starts a countdown of 45 days for Congress to respond. If passed, Gordon said local stations like WTVP stand to lose nearly a third of their annual funding. 'This isn't just about national programming,' Gordon warned. 'Smaller stations will feel the cut even more sharply. At WTVP, we'd have to immediately shift into emergency fundraising mode to try to close the gap. It could slow or stop local and educational programming, and delay production for new shows.' The rescission package comes on the heels of another blow to public media. President Trump issued an executive order on May 1 to shut down PBS and NPR, citing bias and irrelevance. Both organizations have filed lawsuits in response, arguing the order is a violation of the First Amendment. Gordon said the ripple effects from the loss of funding will be felt everywhere, from fewer children's programs to potential job impacts at the local level. 'Some of that federal funding goes to actually producing programs. So you're going to see a shortening of production timelines. And then additionally, at the local level, it's going to immediately need us to move into a grassroots fundraising mode to try and make up for that difference,' she said. So, how can you help? Gordon said to call or send a message to your lawmakers voicing your support for public media. You can also visit 'It takes five minutes and could make a real difference,' she said. On June 3, PBS President and CEO Paula Kerger echoed Gordon's sentiments in a statement. 'The proposed rescissions would have a devastating impact on PBS member stations and the essential role they play in communities, particularly smaller and rural stations that rely on federal funding for a larger portion of their budgets,' she said. 'Without PBS member stations, Americans will lose unique local programming and emergency services in times of crisis. There's nothing more American than PBS, and we are proud to highlight real issues, individuals, and places that would otherwise be overlooked by commercial media.' PBS was created in by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting in 1969 to provide Americans with a non-commercial space for news, educational programming, and inspirational content. There are approximately 350 stations across the country. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
USA Today
3 hours ago
- USA Today
LA police chief: ‘Ready to meet whatever challenges we may face'
LA police chief: 'Ready to meet whatever challenges we may face' LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell says department is 'well prepared' to handle ICE protests; has a 'great working relationship' with the National Guard. Show Caption Hide Caption Trump orders troops to LA as agents, protesters clash over immigration President Trump ordered 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles to combat violent protesters opposed to immigration enforcement. Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell told USA TODAY his department will be 'well prepared' should any civil unrest occur during the third day of protests across the city. 'We certainly have a heavier deployment than usual,' McDonnell said June 8, declining to give a specific number. The chief said officers will be deployed outside a federal court building, the Metropolitan Detention Center, City Hall, and some parks where protests and demonstrations against deportation raids are scheduled to take place. 'You never know what's going to happen,' McDonnell said. 'We're more heavily deployed to meet whatever challenges we may face.' The chief's comments come as approximately 300 National Guard members arrived in Los Angeles after President Trump ordered the deployment of 2,000 officers, a move that California Gov. Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass have sharply criticized as inflammatory and unnecessary. Bass added that the presence of the National Guard could cause a 'chaotic escalation.' McDonnell said the LAPD is still figuring out what role the National Guard will play during any protests. 'It's still to be determined,' McDonnell said. 'Some of them just got on the ground, and we're trying to figure out how we can make this all work for everybody. For the city, the county and beyond. Our whole focus is on public safety.' McDonnell said the LAPD has worked very closely with the National Guard for months due to the deadly Palisades fires, adding, 'We have a great working relationship' with them. 'We're both here for the same reason, and that's ultimately to keep everybody safe,' McDonnell said. The determination of which agency will take the lead in handling any unruliness at protests and demonstrations, depends on when and where the unrest occurs, McDonnell said. The chief said there are 44 other law enforcement agencies in L.A. County that assist each other under a mutual aid agreement. 'It depends on where they are and what the circumstances are,' McDonnell said. 'We're responsible for the city of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is responsible for the county. We work together all the time.' McDonnell said the LAPD will not take part in any immigration enforcement action as prohibited by law under the California Values Act, often referred to as a 'sanctuary law.' But the department will have a presence to quell any civil unrest as protesters exercise their First Amendment rights, the chief said. 'We adapt to the circumstances as they are presented to us,' McDonnell said. 'We're putting ourselves out there on the line every day, and I'm proud of our people and the job that they do on behalf of the community.'
