2/12/16
To honor the memory of Bruce and Martha Sattler and their nearly 45 years of unwavering devotion to civil rights and civil liberties in Colorado, the ACLU of Colorado has established the Bruce and Martha Sattler Fellowship Fund.
Bruce and Martha Sattler both passed away in 2015. Together, they held almost every conceivable Board and staff leadership position at the ACLU of Colorado. To keep their spirit alive within the organization, the Bruce and Martha Sattler Fellowship Fund will set aside funds to assist in bringing young civil rights and civil liberties lawyers and advocates to work at the ACLU of Colorado as “Sattler Fellows.”
“Bruce and Martha Sattler devoted their lives to civil rights and civil liberties, and their impact on the ACLU of Colorado is beyond description,” said ACLU of Colorado Executive Director Nathan Woodliff-Stanley. “The Bruce and Martha Sattler Fellowship Fund will honor their legacy while providing opportunities to future generations of civil rights and civil liberties leaders in Colorado.”
The ACLU of Colorado will work with law schools, colleges, universities, and independent fellowship programs to attract and provide support for fellows and interns to work on important civil rights and civil liberties issues in Colorado. The fund will also support the work of summer and temporary legal interns at the organization.
“Apart from both of their unique talents, intelligence, wit, passion, warmth, and spirit, Bruce and Martha were incredibly wonderful souls,” said Woodliff-Stanley. “They are deeply missed at the ACLU of Colorado, but it gives us great pride to honor their memory through the Bruce and Martha Sattler Fellowship Fund.”
For more information or to contribute to the Bruce and Martha Sattler Fellowship Fund, please contact ACLU of Colorado Deputy Director Stephen Meswarb at [email protected].
To learn more about the Sattlers and their impact on civil rights and civil liberties in Colorado, read the ACLU of Colorado tributes to Bruce and Martha.

ACLU of Colorado Executive Director Nathan Woodliff-Stanley presented the following testimony to the Colorado Senate Judiciary Committee in opposition to SB 64, a bill that would have allowed death sentences to be given by non-unanimous juries.  The bill was defeated.
Thank you, Madam Chair.  My name is Nathan Woodliff-Stanley, Executive Director of the ACLU of Colorado, and I testify in opposition to Senate Bill 64.

There are only three states that currently allow non-unanimous juries in death penalty sentencing—Florida, Alabama and Delaware.  Two of these states are considering legislation to require unanimous juries, and one is moving closer to ending the death penalty entirely.  There is no reason for Colorado to be the only state moving in the other direction, possibly unconstitutionally, to allow non-unanimous juries in death penalty cases.  Death is an irreversible punishment that should never be allowed under weaker standards than we require for something like shoplifting.  Juries are already structurally biased toward death sentences because jurors have to be death-qualified, willing to give the death penalty, to even serve on a death penalty jury.  If juries in Colorado have not been imposing the death penalty as often, perhaps that should be seen as a sign that we are moving away from a bad and broken system, not as a reason to make executions easier.

By nearly all accounts, the death penalty is useless as a deterrent, and in fact murder rates are higher in states using the death penalty than in those that do not.  Even with unanimous juries, many innocent people across this nation have been given death sentences only to be exonerated many years later.  The last thing we should be doing is increasing the likelihood of fatal mistakes here in Colorado.

Even apart from bigger-picture issues with the death penalty, there are many problems with non-unanimous juries.  A non-unanimous sentence would be seen as less valid and more open to challenge.  A non-unanimous jury is more likely to give death after a mistaken conviction, and in fact, Florida, with non-unanimous juries, has the highest rate of exonerations after mistaken death sentences in the country.  We should not adopt legislation that will make it more likely to execute someone who is innocent, someone who is mentally ill, or someone who is marginalized or poor or who simply did not have good counsel.  Please vote against Senate Bill 64.

DENVER - The ACLU of Colorado filed suit this morning on behalf of Danny Ledonne, a former professor who was banned by school officials from the Adams State University campus in Alamosa, CO after he created a website criticizing various university administration practices.

From May 2011 to June 2015, Ledonne taught in the Mass Communications program and performed video production work for Adams State University.  In September 2015, after his employment at the university had ended, he launched WatchingAdams.org, a website that “provides ongoing coverage of critical news and information about Adams State University, a public institution of higher education in southern Colorado.”  The website includes public compensation data and interviews with former students, faculty, and staff.

On October 12th, Ledonne posted a series of articles criticizing the pay disparity between faculty and the administration and alleging that the university had violated the Colorado Wage Act by not making timely payments to adjunct professors.  Two days later, University President Beverlee McClure issued a “No Trespass Order” to Ledonne, delivered at his residence by campus police chief Paul Grohowski.  The order declared that for “an indefinite period of time,” Ledonne was prohibited from being on Adams State University property and that his presence on campus “would result in his immediate arrest for trespass.”

“Not only were Danny Ledonne’s First Amendment rights violated when university officials retaliated against him for operating a website criticizing their policies, the ban was issued without notice or an explanation of the evidence being used to support it, which violated his constitutional right to due process,” said ACLU of Colorado Legal Director Mark Silverstein.

The ACLU complaint, filed this morning in Federal District Court, cites a 1973 Colorado Supreme Court decision finding that “a non-student’s right to access Colorado public university functions and facilities which are otherwise open to the public-at-large, is a valuable property or liberty interest entitled to constitutional protection.” According to the Court, access to a public university cannot be denied without first providing adequate notice of charges, reasonable opportunity to prepare to meet the charges, an orderly hearing, and a fair and impartial decision.

“We bring this lawsuit to protect the rights of not just Mr. Ledonne, but all Coloradoans,” said ACLU of Colorado cooperating attorney N. Reid Neureiter of Wheeler, Trigg, O’Donnell LLP. “As the Colorado Supreme Court has recognized, public universities are important public resources.  Members of the public should not be barred from otherwise public college campuses without being given notice of what they have supposedly done, and being given an opportunity to challenge the allegations.”

Ledonne operates a video production business, Emberwilde Productions, and many of his professional obligations require him to attend and film events on the Adams State campus, which is open to the public.  For instance, he has served as the Director of the Southern Colorado Film Festival at Adams State.  He was unable to attend the 2015 Festival because of the campus ban, which was issued just one day before the festival began.

“Adams State is the hub of artistic and cultural engagement in Alamosa.  If I cannot go on to campus for fear of being arrested, my personal reputation and ability to earn a living in this community are severely hindered,” said Ledonne.  “The climate of fear this creates for others who might also wish to speak up is a broad chilling effect that cannot go unchallenged.”

The ACLU has asked the Court to immediately stop Adams State University from enforcing the campus ban, as well as to rule that Ledonne’s constitutional right to free speech and due process were violated.

more on this case