DETROIT – In a ruling on Tuesday described by local officials as “historic”, a federal court in Detroit paved the way toward dismissing a lawsuit challenging Hamtramck’s policy prohibiting LGBTQ+ pride flags from being flown on public property — a decision hailed as a “complete victory” by the city’s leadership, which defended the policy as a means of maintaining political neutrality and avoiding societal division.

Judge David Lawson of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan ruled that Hamtramck’s 2023 policy on flag displays on city-owned property is “neutral” and “does not violate the First Amendment”, which protects free speech. He explained in his July 15 ruling that municipal flagpoles are not public forums for free expression, but platforms for government speech.

Clearing the way for lawsuit dismissal

The lawsuit was filed by Russ Gordon and Cathy Stackpoole, former members of the Hamtramck Human Relations Commission, who argued that the city violated both federal and state law — as well as the First Amendment — when its all-Muslim City Council voted unanimously in June 2023 to ban flags with political, ethnic or religious symbolism on city property.

The plaintiffs asked the court to overturn the policy and reinstate them to their (unpaid) volunteer commission roles after they were dismissed for defying the flag ban by raising a rainbow “Pride” flag on a city flagpole on Joseph Campau Street, the main thoroughfare in a city of 27,000, where Yemeni and Bangladeshi Muslims form the majority.

Hamtramck’s policy only permits the display of the American flag, the Michigan state flag, the city flag, the POW/MIA flag and flags representing the national origins of the city’s residents — which implicitly excludes the Pride flag, long a source of tension between LGBTQ+ activists and conservative groups.

Although the ban also prohibits religious, ethnic, racial and political flags, the impetus was the LGBTQ+ Pride flag, which many local Muslims complained was an affront to their religion.

The lawsuit, filed by attorney Marc M. Susselman, argues the ban violates the First Amendment right to free speech and the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

“It is unconstitutional for government to select what speech will be permitted, and what speech will be prohibited, based on the content or viewpoint of the message conveyed by the speech,” the lawsuit states.

Susselman argues that the ban is not neutral because it allows the display of the Prisoners of War flag and other countries’ flags.

Court: No discrimination, no religious motivation

Judge Lawson rejected the plaintiffs’ claims that the policy targeted the LGBTQ+ community or stemmed from discriminatory or religious motivations.

“There is no legal or factual basis to support such allegations,” he wrote, concluding that the city’s flag policy was constitutional and aligned with the principles of government speech.

Lawson added that allowing flags representing different identities or political causes could lead to endless disputes and conflicting demands from various groups — something the city reasonably sought to avoid through a unified and neutral policy.

He also emphasized that governments have the authority to impose reasonable restrictions on the messages conveyed on government property, so long as those restrictions are not aimed at suppressing specific viewpoints.

Addressing claims that the policy was rooted in religious bias — since all Council members are Muslim and some have publicly criticized homosexuality — Lawson stated, “Legislative intent is irrelevant to constitutional validity. The courts consider outcomes, not individual motives.”

The ruling further dismissed arguments that the policy violated the Equal Protection Clause, finding that the legal claim had not been properly presented.

Mayor Ghalib “celebrates great victory”

In a Facebook post, Mayor Amer Ghalib, who is of Yemeni descent, described the court’s decision as a “great victory.”

“In the case where the deep state stood with all its weight against the mayor and City Council — today they lost,” Ghalib wrote. “Time has proven your mayor stood on the right side of history, under a government ruled by law and justice.

“We will prevail in other cases as well, against the lies, deceit and manufactured crises stirred up by powerful interests within and outside the city,” he added. “Trust your leadership and don’t fall for false media narratives that aim to tarnish the real progress we’ve made.”

Odey Meroueh, a Dearborn-based attorney who represented Hamtramck in the lawsuit, said he and his clients welcome the court’s decision.