Case: Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle v. Baltimore Police Department

1:20-cv-00929 | U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland

Filed Date: April 9, 2020

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On April 1, 2020, the Baltimore Board of Estimates approved a contract between the Baltimore Police Department (BPD) and Persistent Surveillance Systems, LLC (PSS) for an “Aerial Investigation Research” (AIR) pilot program in Baltimore, Maryland. The pilot program was to take place for six months, during which PSS would fly planes over the city for approximately twelve hours per day. While in flight, the planes would use advanced wide-angle camera systems to collect images of the city that woul…

On April 1, 2020, the Baltimore Board of Estimates approved a contract between the Baltimore Police Department (BPD) and Persistent Surveillance Systems, LLC (PSS) for an “Aerial Investigation Research” (AIR) pilot program in Baltimore, Maryland. The pilot program was to take place for six months, during which PSS would fly planes over the city for approximately twelve hours per day. While in flight, the planes would use advanced wide-angle camera systems to collect images of the city that would be reconstructed as slow-frame-rate video recordings of pedestrians and vehicles to be used by BPD.

Eight days after the contract was approved, on April 9, 2020, the plaintiffs, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (a self-described “grassroots think tank” that advocates for policy change to improve conditions for Baltimore’s black community) and two individual activists filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. Represented by the ACLU of Maryland, the plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief against the BPD for two types of Constitutional violations. 

The first set of claims arose under the Fourth Amendment. The plaintiffs argued that AIR violated the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement because its ability to capture images of pedestrians and vehicles amounted to indiscriminate searches that lacked “individualized suspicion or judicial approval.” The use of these images by the BPD similarly violated the Constitution, according to the plaintiffs, because the police could analyze information from the planes without warrants. The second claim was based on the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of association. The plaintiffs claimed that the planes' ability to capture aerial images of 90 percent of the city every second during their 12 hour flights was “constant and inescapable” monitoring that violated the Constitutional right to association. As an example, the complaint cited the effect the surveillance would have on one of the named plaintiffs who, as part of her work as an activist, regularly visited Baltimore neighborhoods affected by street violence to meet with community members shortly after violent crimes (including murders) occurred. This plaintiff was apprehensive about how her work would be unjustifiably scrutinized by police because the AIR program would be likely to generate an individualized report of her movements based on the frequency that she visited these high-crime areas. Because the contract between BPD and PSS established an official municipal policy under color of state law, the plaintiffs sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiffs asked the district court to: 1) declare that the AIR program violated the First and Fourth Amendments; 2) permanently enjoin the BPD from operating the AIR program or collecting any images from it; 3) order the BPD to expunge all records of the plaintiffs gathered as a result of AIR surveillance; 4) award the plaintiffs attorneys’ fees. The case was assigned to District Judge Richard D. Bennett.

On the same day they filed the complaint, the plaintiffs moved for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to prevent the defendants from operating the AIR pilot program and using any of the data collected from it. Judge Bennett held a telephone hearing on the motion on the afternoon of April 9, 2020. That same day, Judge Bennett entered an order prohibiting any AIR program flights from collecting, retaining, or accessing photographic imagery of Baltimore until the court’s hearing on the preliminary injunction on April 21, 2020. However, the court allowed the BPD to continue undertaking preparatory activities for the launch of the AIR program.

On April 21, 2020, the court conducted a hearing on the motion for a preliminary injunction. On April 24, 2020, Judge Bennett issued an opinion denying the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. He held that the AIR program did not constitute a “search” under the Fourth Amendment or violate the First Amendment, that the balance of the equities weighed against the grant of a preliminary injunction, and that it was not within the public interest to grant a preliminary injunction. 456 F. Supp. 3d 699. Because the plaintiffs did not succeed on their motion for a preliminary injunction, Judge Bennett entered an order allowing the AIR pilot program to proceed. On the same day, the plaintiffs appealed the lower court’s decision to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

While the parties were awaiting the Fourth Circuit’s decision on the preliminary injunction, on August 12, 2020, the BPD filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On November 5, 2020, before the plaintiffs could respond to the motion to dismiss, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the denial of the preliminary injunction. A divided three-judge panel (Circuit Judge Harvie Wilkinson) held that the district court did not abuse discretion in denying the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction because the plaintiffs were not likely to succeed on the merits of their claims that: 1) the AIR program violated the Fourth Amendment’s protection of a reasonable expectation of privacy, 2) the AIR program violated the Fourth Amendment under a balancing test, or 3) the AIR program violated the plaintiffs’ right to association under the First Amendment. Furthermore, the Fourth Circuit held that the balance of the equities weighed against the issuance of a preliminary injunction, noting that the high crime rate in Baltimore and newness of the pilot program supported the BPD’s effort to implement a technological innovation to stem violence. In a dissenting opinion, Chief Judge Roger Gregory disagreed with the majority’s characterization of the AIR program as a form of short-term surveillance and pointed to the program’s capacity to track individuals over time to reveal their “most intimate associations and activities” to support his conclusion that the AIR program violated the Fourth Amendment. 979 F.3d 219.

On December 22, 2020, the Fourth Circuit granted the plaintiffs’ petition for a rehearing en banc. A 15-judge panel heard arguments from both parties on March 8, 2021. An 8-7 majority overruled the three-judge panel’s decision and reversed the district court’s denial of the preliminary injunction on June 24, 2021. Chief Judge Gregory wrote the majority opinion, supported by two separate concurrences. The first concurrence by Chief Judge Gregory himself was joined by Circuit Judges Wynn, Thacker, and Harris. The second concurrence was written by Circuit Judge Wynn and joined by Circuit Judges Motz, Thacker, and Harris. The minority filed three separate dissents. The first dissent was written by Circuit Judge Wilkinson and joined by Circuit Judges Niemeyer, Agee, and Quattlebaum, and joined in part by Circuit Judges Diaz, Richardson, and Rushing. Circuit Judges Niemeyer and Diaz filed their own independent dissenting opinions which no other Judges joined. 2021 WL 2584408.

One of the issues on appeal was whether the case was moot due to the fact that the Board of Estimates voted to terminate the AIR program on February 3, 2021. According to the majority opinion, while AIR program planes stopped flying over Baltimore on October 31, 2020, the BPD submitted requests to RSS for analysis of data collected during the pilot program up until December 8, 2020. On February 2, 2021, BPD and PSS announced that they had deleted most of the data (all but 14.2 percent of images collected) that had been collected over the course of the AIR program. Because the remaining data that the BPD had access to documented thousands of hours of public movement and were being used in around 150 open criminal investigations, the Fourth Circuit held that the preliminary injunction sought by the plaintiffs was not moot as the requested relief, a prohibition on the usage of RSS data by police, could still be granted. 2021 WL 2584408.

On the merits of the plaintiffs’ claim for preliminary injunctive relief, the Fourth Circuit found that the district court erred in holding that the AIR program was capable only of short-term tracking, pointing to the fact that the information collected by RSS from its planes was even more precise than GPS and cell phone tracking data. Further, the majority found that the AIR program went beyond an “augmentation” of ordinary police capabilities. Instead, the opinion described the data collected by the program as “record[ing] the movements of a city” in a way that could be readily analyzed to identify the locations of individuals over an extended period of time. The majority held that police access of AIR program data constituted a search and, as a result, warrantless collection and analysis of the data violated the Fourth Amendment. The case was remanded to the district court for proceedings consistent with the en banc opinion. 2021 WL 2584408.

On August 20, 2021, the parties jointly moved to withdraw the BPD’s August 2020 motion to dismiss and to stay the proceedings, other than those relating to entry of a preliminary injunction in accordance with the en banc Fourth Circuit’s opinion. In the motion, the BPD also noted that it was still evaluating internally whether to file a petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Pursuant to the en banc Fourth Circuit’s opinion, the plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction again on August 25, 2021. In the interests of preserving their appellate rights, the BPD opposed the preliminary injunction, but agreed that the injunction’s specific terms comported with the Fourth Circuit’s opinion. Pursuant to the proposed injunction, the defendants, their agents, employees, successors in office, and all others acting in active concert with them (including but not limited to PSS), would be prohibited from accessing data generated by the AIR program, subject to certain exceptions. Furthermore, the injunction would mandate that PSS maintain sole possession of all other AIR program data consistent with the continuing confidentiality obligations and use limitations contained in its contract with the BPD, and that such data would not be accessed for any purpose aside from certain exceptions. The proposed preliminary injunction carved out some exceptions including that the BPD would be permitted to access the AIR program data in reports they possessed for the purpose of sharing those reports with government prosecutors in existing criminal prosecutions or with defendants in criminal prosecutions. The BPD would only be permitted to release data to government prosecutors in connection with prosecutions already existing on June 24, 2021. Additionally, the BPD would be permitted to access AIR program data with the plaintiffs in accordance with its discovery obligations. Lastly, the injunction would carve out an exception for AIR program data that had already been disseminated to the New York University Law School Policing Project, the RAND Corporation, the University of Baltimore, or the public. 

The court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction on November 29, 2021. 

On February 14, 2022, the parties jointly moved to dismiss the case after reaching a settlement agreement. Pursuant to the agreement, the BPD agreed to: 1) not resume the AIR program; 2) not access any AIR program data for any reason, aside from the agreed upon exceptions; 3) expunge all AIR program data not subject to the exceptions; and 4) pay the plaintiffs $99,000 for attorneys’ fees. The settlement agreement carved out exceptions that mirrored those contained in the preliminary injunction. The BPD was permitted to access the AIR program data in reports they possessed for the purpose of sharing those reports with government prosecutors in existing criminal prosecutions or with defendants in criminal prosecutions already existing on June 24, 2021. AIR program data that had already been disseminated to the New York University Law School Policing Project, the Rand Corporation, the University of Baltimore, or the public was not subject to the terms of the settlement. PSS would maintain sole possession of all other AIR program data consistent with the continuing confidentiality obligations and use limitations contained in its agreement with the BPD.

The court granted the motion and dismissed the case on February 17, 2022, but retained jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the agreement.

Summary Authors

Sabrina Glavota (5/22/2020)

Esteban Woo Kee (7/28/2021)

Nina Gerdes (4/29/2023)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17055584/parties/leaders-of-a-beautiful-struggle-v-baltimore-police-department/


Judge(s)

Agee, G. Steven (Virginia)

Bennett, Richard D. (Maryland)

Diaz, Albert (North Carolina)

Floyd, Henry Franklin (South Carolina)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Gorski, Ashley (New York)

Attorney for Defendant
Judge(s)

Agee, G. Steven (Virginia)

Bennett, Richard D. (Maryland)

Diaz, Albert (North Carolina)

Floyd, Henry Franklin (South Carolina)

Gregory, Roger L. (Virginia)

Harris, Pamela Ann (Maryland)

Keenan, Barbara Milano (Virginia)

King, Robert Bruce (South Carolina)

Motz, Diana Jane Gribbon (Maryland)

Niemeyer, Paul Victor (Maryland)

Quattlebaum, A. Marvin Jr. (South Carolina)

Richardson, Julius Ness (South Carolina)

Rushing, Allison Jones (South Carolina)

Thacker, Stephanie Dawn (West Virginia)

Wilkinson, J. Harvie III (District of Columbia)

Wynn, James Andrew Jr. (North Carolina)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:20-cv-00929

0:20-01495

Docket

June 25, 2021

June 25, 2021

Docket
1

1:20-cv-00929

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

Complaint
15

1:20-cv-00929

Memorandum Order

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

Order/Opinion
2-1

1:20-cv-00929

Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Support of their Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order & a Preliminary Injunction

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

Pleading / Motion / Brief
32

1:20-cv-00929

Memorandum Opinion

April 24, 2020

April 24, 2020

Order/Opinion

456 F.Supp.3d 456

46

1:20-cv-00929

0:20-01495

[Opinion]

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Nov. 5, 2020

Nov. 5, 2020

Order/Opinion

979 F.3d 979

93

1:20-cv-00929

0:20-01495

[Opinion]

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

June 24, 2021

June 24, 2021

Order/Opinion

2 F.4th 2

60

1:20-cv-00929

Memorandum Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction

Nov. 29, 2021

Nov. 29, 2021

Order/Opinion
63-1

Settlement Agreement and Release

Feb. 14, 2022

Feb. 14, 2022

Settlement Agreement

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17055584/leaders-of-a-beautiful-struggle-v-baltimore-police-department/

Last updated Feb. 19, 2024, 3 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0416-8606257.), filed by Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle, Kevin James, Erricka Bridgeford. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons, # 3 Summons)(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

1 Civil Cover Sheet

View on PACER

2 Summons

View on PACER

3 Summons

View on PACER

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

Clearinghouse

Status Conference

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER
2

MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order & Preliminary Injunction by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support)(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

1 Memorandum in Support

View on Clearinghouse

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

Clearinghouse
3

AFFIDAVIT re 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order & Preliminary Injunction of Alexia Ramirez by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit (A) BPD Presentation, # 2 Exhibit (B) BPD/PSS Contract, # 3 Exhibit (C-1) PSS Hawkeye II Web Pages Part 1 of 2, # 4 Exhibit (C-2) PSS Hawkeye II Web Pages Part 2 of 2, # 5 Exhibit (D) Unique in the Crowd Study, # 6 Exhibit (E) PSS Nighthawk II Web Page)(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

1 Exhibit (A) BPD Presentation

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit (B) BPD/PSS Contract

View on RECAP

3 Exhibit (C-1) PSS Hawkeye II Web Pages Part 1 of 2

View on RECAP

4 Exhibit (C-2) PSS Hawkeye II Web Pages Part 2 of 2

View on RECAP

5 Exhibit (D) Unique in the Crowd Study

View on RECAP

6 Exhibit (E) PSS Nighthawk II Web Page

View on RECAP

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

RECAP
4

AFFIDAVIT re 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order & Preliminary Injunction of Dayvon Love, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

RECAP
5

AFFIDAVIT re 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order & Preliminary Injunction of Erricka Bridgeford by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

RECAP
6

AFFIDAVIT re 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order & Preliminary Injunction of Kevin James by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

RECAP
7

NOTICE by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle re 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order & Preliminary Injunction of Proposed Order Granting TRO (Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER
8

NOTICE by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle re 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order & Preliminary Injunction of Proposed Order Granting Preliminary Injunction (Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

RECAP
9

MOTION To Omit Home Address From Caption by Kevin James (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

1 Memorandum in Support

View on PACER

2 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER
10

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Brett Max Kaufman (Filing fee $100, receipt number 0416-8606411.) by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER
11

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Ashley Gorski (Filing fee $100, receipt number 0416-8606437.) by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER
12

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Alexia Ramirez (Filing fee $100, receipt number 0416-8606444.) by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER
13

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Nathan Freed Wessler (Filing fee $100, receipt number 0416-8606446.) by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER
14

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Ben Wizner (Filing fee $100, receipt number 0416-8606459.) by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER

Telephone conference with all parties re: status held on 4/9/2020 before Judge Richard D. Bennett. (NOT on the record) (krs, Deputy Clerk)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER
15

ORDER directing the Defendants to respond to Plaintiffs' Motion by 4/15/2020 at 4:00 p.m. and Plaintiffs shall file reply by 4/17/2020 at 4:00 p.m. The Court will conduct a Preliminary Injunction Hearing on 4/21/2020 at 11:00 a.m. and issue a decision on the Plaintiffs' Motion by 4/24/2020 at 5:00 p.m. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 4/9/2020. (krs, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

Clearinghouse
16

ORDER granting 9 Motion for Permission to Omit Home Address from Caption; granting 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 4/9/2020. (cc Attorney Admissions 4/9/2020) (krs, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER
17

NOTICE of Appearance by Dana Petersen Moore on behalf of Baltimore Police Department, Michael S Harrison (Moore, Dana) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER
18

NOTICE of Appearance by Elisabeth Walden on behalf of Baltimore Police Department, Michael S Harrison (Walden, Elisabeth) (Entered: 04/09/2020)

April 9, 2020

April 9, 2020

PACER

Deficiency Notice

April 10, 2020

April 10, 2020

PACER

Deficiency Notice as to Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle -- Your Local Rule 103.3 disclosure statement has not been filed. The Statement must be filed by 4/17/2020 (kw2s, Deputy Clerk)

April 10, 2020

April 10, 2020

PACER
19

PAPERLESS ORDER granting 10 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Brett Max Kaufman. Directing attorney Brett Max Kaufman to use the attorney's existing CM/ECF login and password previously issued in this Court. The account password can be reset at http://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/electronic-case-filing-password-reset. Signed by Clerk on 4/10/2020. (srds, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/10/2020)

April 10, 2020

April 10, 2020

PACER
20

QC NOTICE: 1 Complaint, filed by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle was filed incorrectly.*** Please submit a proposed summons for Michael S Harrison. Use the event Notice> Notice(Other) and link to 1 Complaint (kw2s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/10/2020)

April 10, 2020

April 10, 2020

PACER
21

PAPERLESS ORDER granting 11 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Ashley Marie Gorski. Directing attorney Ashley Marie Gorski to register online for CM/ECF at http://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/electronic-case-filing-registration. Signed by Clerk on 4/10/2020. (srds, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/10/2020)

April 10, 2020

April 10, 2020

PACER
22

PAPERLESS ORDER granting 12 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Alexia Ramirez. Directing attorney Alexia Ramirez to register online for CM/ECF at http://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/electronic-case-filing-registration. Signed by Clerk on 4/10/2020. (srds, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/10/2020)

April 10, 2020

April 10, 2020

PACER
23

PAPERLESS ORDER granting 13 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Nathan Freed Wessler. Directing attorney Nathan Freed Wessler to use the attorney's existing CM/ECF login and password previously issued in this Court. The account password can be reset at http://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/electronic-case-filing-password-reset. Signed by Clerk on 4/10/2020. (srds, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/10/2020)

April 10, 2020

April 10, 2020

PACER
24

PAPERLESS ORDER granting 14 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Ben Wizner. Directing attorney Ben Wizner to register online for CM/ECF at http://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/electronic-case-filing-registration. Signed by Clerk on 4/10/2020. (srds, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/10/2020)

April 10, 2020

April 10, 2020

PACER
25

NOTICE by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle re 1 Complaint, Corrected Summons for Michael Harrison (Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/14/2020)

April 14, 2020

April 14, 2020

PACER
26

Local Rule 103.3 Disclosure Statement by Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/14/2020)

April 14, 2020

April 14, 2020

RECAP
27

Summons Issued 21 days as to Baltimore Police Department, Michael S Harrison. (Attachments: # 1 Summons)(kw2s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/15/2020)

1 Summons

View on PACER

April 15, 2020

April 15, 2020

PACER
28

Local Rule 103.3 Disclosure Statement by Baltimore Police Department (Walden, Elisabeth) (Entered: 04/15/2020)

April 15, 2020

April 15, 2020

RECAP
29

Local Rule 103.3 Disclosure Statement by Michael S Harrison (Walden, Elisabeth) (Entered: 04/15/2020)

April 15, 2020

April 15, 2020

RECAP
30

RESPONSE in Opposition re 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order & Preliminary Injunction filed by Baltimore Police Department, Michael S Harrison. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Walden, Elisabeth) (Entered: 04/15/2020)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit B

View on RECAP

April 15, 2020

April 15, 2020

RECAP
31

REPLY to Response to Motion re 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order & Preliminary Injunction filed by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle.(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/17/2020)

April 17, 2020

April 17, 2020

RECAP

Telephone Motion Hearing held on 4/21/2020 re 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order & Preliminary Injunction filed by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle before Judge Richard D. Bennett.(Court Reporter: Christine Asif) (chs, Deputy Clerk)

April 21, 2020

April 21, 2020

PACER

Telephone Conference

April 21, 2020

April 21, 2020

PACER
32

MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 4/24/2020. (cags, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/24/2020)

April 24, 2020

April 24, 2020

Clearinghouse
33

ORDER denying 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; the Air Pilot Program may proceed. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 4/24/2020 (cags, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/24/2020)

April 24, 2020

April 24, 2020

RECAP
34

NOTICE OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL as to 33 Order on Motion for TRO, 32 Memorandum Opinion by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle. Filing fee $ 505, receipt number 0416-8625995.(Rocah, David) (Entered: 04/24/2020)

April 24, 2020

April 24, 2020

RECAP
35

Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals re 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal. IMPORTANT NOTICE: To access forms which you are required to file with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit please go to http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov and click on Forms & Notices.(Filing Fee incorrectly on transmittal as unpaid and the Filing Fee is Paid)(slss, Deputy Clerk) Modified on 4/27/2020 (slss, Deputy Clerk). (Entered: 04/27/2020)

April 27, 2020

April 27, 2020

RECAP
36

USCA Case Number 20-1495 for 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal filed by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle - Case Manager - Cathi Bennett (slss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/28/2020)

April 28, 2020

April 28, 2020

RECAP
37

TRANSCRIPT ORDER ACKNOWLEDGMENT by Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle for proceedings held on Telephone motion hearing of 04/21/2020 before Judge Bennett, re 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal - Transcript due by 4/30/2020. (Court Reporter; Christine Asif)(slss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 04/28/2020)

April 28, 2020

April 28, 2020

RECAP
38

NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT for dates of 4/21/2020, before Judge Richard D. Bennett, re 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal Court Reporter Christine Asif, Telephone number 410-962-4492. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained from the Court Reporter or through PACER. Does this satisfy all appellate orders for this reporter? - Y. Redaction Request due 5/19/2020. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 5/29/2020. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 7/27/2020.(ca, Court Reporter) (Entered: 04/28/2020)

April 28, 2020

April 28, 2020

PACER
39

NOTICE of Appearance by Kara K Lynch on behalf of Baltimore Police Department, Michael S Harrison (Lynch, Kara) (Entered: 04/30/2020)

April 30, 2020

April 30, 2020

PACER
40

(WITHDRAWN PER ECF NO. 57)MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Baltimore Police Department, Michael S Harrison (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Lynch, Kara) Modified on 8/23/2021 (kb3s, Deputy Clerk). (Entered: 08/12/2020)

1 Memorandum in Support

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit

View on RECAP

3 Text of Proposed Order

View on RECAP

Aug. 12, 2020

Aug. 12, 2020

RECAP
41

Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 40 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Rocah, David) (Entered: 08/14/2020)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

Aug. 14, 2020

Aug. 14, 2020

PACER
42

ORDER granting 41 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 40 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 8/17/2020. (kw2s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/17/2020)

Aug. 17, 2020

Aug. 17, 2020

PACER
43

MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney on behalf of Alexia Ramirez by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle(Rocah, David) (Entered: 09/03/2020)

Sept. 3, 2020

Sept. 3, 2020

RECAP
44

ORDER Approving 43 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney on behalf of Alexia Ramirez. Attorney Alexia Ramirez terminated. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 9/3/2020. (kw2s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/03/2020)

Sept. 3, 2020

Sept. 3, 2020

PACER
45

JUDGMENT of USCA (certified copy) "Affirming" the judgment of the District Court as to 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal filed by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (Attachments: # 1 Opinion)(slss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/06/2020)

1 Opinion

View on RECAP

Nov. 6, 2020

Nov. 6, 2020

RECAP
46

Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 40 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Rocah, David) (Entered: 11/11/2020)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

Nov. 11, 2020

Nov. 11, 2020

Clearinghouse
47

ORDER granting 46 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 40 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 11/12/2020. (kw2s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/12/2020)

Nov. 12, 2020

Nov. 12, 2020

PACER
48

STAY OF MANDATE of USCA as to 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal filed by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle. (slss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/20/2020)

Nov. 20, 2020

Nov. 20, 2020

RECAP
49

ORDER of USCA"Granting" rehearing en banc as to 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal filed by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (slss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 12/22/2020)

Dec. 22, 2020

Dec. 22, 2020

RECAP
50

(ELECTRONICALLY FILED IN ERROR)ORDER of USCA "Granting" rehearing en banc as to 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal filed by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (slss, Deputy Clerk) Modified on 12/22/2020 (slss, Deputy Clerk). (Entered: 12/22/2020)

Dec. 22, 2020

Dec. 22, 2020

PACER
51

ORDER of USCA "Granting" the motion by Rachel A. Simmonsen to withdraw fromfurther representation on appeal as to 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal filed by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (slss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/10/2021)

June 10, 2021

June 10, 2021

PACER
52

JUDGMENT of USCA (certified copy) "Reversing" the judgment of the District Court and "Remanding" to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with the Court's decision as to 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal filed by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle. (Attachments: # 1 Opinion)(slss, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/25/2021)

June 25, 2021

June 25, 2021

PACER
53

MANDATE of USCA as to 34 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal filed by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (jb5, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/16/2021)

July 16, 2021

July 16, 2021

PACER
54

Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Gorski, Ashley) (Entered: 07/29/2021)

July 29, 2021

July 29, 2021

PACER
55

ORDER granting 54 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 7/29/2021. (kw2s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/29/2021)

July 29, 2021

July 29, 2021

PACER
56

Consent MOTION to Withdraw Without Prejudice Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 40), Joint MOTION to Stay Proceedings by Baltimore Police Department, Michael S Harrison (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Lynch, Kara) (Entered: 08/20/2021)

Aug. 20, 2021

Aug. 20, 2021

RECAP
57

ORDER granting 56 Consent MOTION to Withdraw Without Prejudice Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 40), Joint MOTION to Stay Proceedings. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 8/23/2021. (kb3s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/23/2021)

Aug. 23, 2021

Aug. 23, 2021

PACER
58

MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (Attachments: # (1) Text of Proposed Order)(Gorski, Ashley)

Aug. 25, 2021

Aug. 25, 2021

RECAP
59

RESPONSE in Opposition re 58 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Baltimore Police Department, Michael S Harrison. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Lynch, Kara) (Entered: 09/08/2021)

Sept. 8, 2021

Sept. 8, 2021

PACER
60

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 58 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 11/29/2021. (kb3s, Deputy Clerk)

Nov. 29, 2021

Nov. 29, 2021

Clearinghouse
61

ORDER re:Telephone Conference. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 11/29/2021. (kb3s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 11/30/2021)

Nov. 29, 2021

Nov. 29, 2021

PACER

Telephone Status Conference held on 12/2/2021. NOT on the record before Judge Richard D. Bennett. (kb3s, Deputy Clerk)

Dec. 2, 2021

Dec. 2, 2021

PACER
62

STATUS REPORT JOINT STATUS REPORT by Baltimore Police Department, Michael S Harrison(Lynch, Kara) (Entered: 12/17/2021)

Dec. 17, 2021

Dec. 17, 2021

RECAP
63

Joint MOTION to Dismiss, Joint MOTION Joint Motion for Entry of Agreed Orders of Expungement and Dismissal by Erricka Bridgeford, Kevin James, Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle (Attachments: # 1 Attachment to Joint Motion for Entry of Agreed Orders of Expungement and Dismissal, # 2 Text of Proposed Order for Expungement, # 3 Text of Proposed Order of Dismissal)(Rocah, David) (Entered: 02/14/2022)

Feb. 14, 2022

Feb. 14, 2022

RECAP

Telephone Status Conference held on 2/16/2022. NOT on the record before Judge Richard D. Bennett. (kb3s, Deputy Clerk)

Feb. 16, 2022

Feb. 16, 2022

PACER
64

Joint Correspondence re: Joint Motion for Entry of Agreed Orders of Expungement and Dismissal (Gorski, Ashley) (Entered: 02/16/2022)

Feb. 16, 2022

Feb. 16, 2022

PACER
65

ORDER granting 63 Joint Motion to Dismiss; granting 63 Joint Motion for Entry of Agreed Orders of Expungement and Dismissal. Signed by Judge Richard D. Bennett on 2/17/2022. (Attachments: # 1 Order) (kb3s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 02/17/2022)

Feb. 17, 2022

Feb. 17, 2022

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: Maryland

Case Type(s):

Policing

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 9, 2020

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

A grassroots think-tank that advances the policy interests of black people in the Baltimore, Maryland community and two individual activists from Baltimore.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Attorney Organizations:

ACLU Affiliates (any)

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Baltimore Police Department (Baltimore , Baltimore City), City

Defendant Type(s):

Law-enforcement

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201

Constitutional Clause(s):

Unreasonable search and seizure

Freedom of speech/association

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Monetary Relief

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Litigation

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Amount Defendant Pays: 99,000

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief granted

Warrant/order for search or seizure

Issues

General:

Search policies