FUCK YOU! I can talk about want I want(Read: RULING)

     U.S. District Judge Joseph Irenas of New Jersey recently granted Edward Forchion’s (aka-NJWEEDMAN) request for a preliminary injunction reinstating him to New Jersey’s Intensive Supervision Parole (ISP) program pending trial on his claim that state officials reincarcerated him in retaliation for exercising his First Amendment Rights of Freedom of Speech and Assembly.

     In December 2000, Forchion pleaded guilty to conspiracy to posses marijuana with the intent to distribute and was sentenced to 10 years flat time. He was released into the ISP program on April 3, 2002. ISP is a court administered program that allows prisoners to be released from prison before the end of their sentences and placed on strict supervision. In order to be accepted into the program an inmate must be approved by the ISP resentencing panel, which is comprised of three appointed Judges. The Panel’s substantive decisions are not appealable.

     While in the ISP program; Forchion was actively involved in political efforts to legalize marijuana. He organized and attended rallies, produced and participated in TV commercials, gave interviews to news papers reporters, operated a website, and distributed leaflets. Forchion’s conditions of supervision prohibited him from advocating the use of marijuana. Between May and August of 2002, ISP supervision officials repeatedly warned Forchion that his efforts to legalize Marijuana violated this condition and that he would be returned to prison if he did not refrain from such conduct. Supervision officials wrote several reports detailing Forchion’s political activities, ultimately resulting in his removal from the ISP program by the resentencing panel on August 19, 2002.

     Forchion subsequently filed a “Writ of Habeas Corpus’ and filed suit under 42 U.S.C. statue 1983 and sought a preliminary injunction reinstating him to the ISP program, claiming that he was incarcerated in retaliation for exercising his First Amendment rights. Judge Irenas conbined the "Writ of Habeas Corpus with the 1983 and granted Forchion’s request for a preliminary injunction under the powers of the 1983 statues on January 24^th, 2003. In doing so, the Court refused to apply either the Rooker-Feldman doctrine or the Younger doctrine, both of which were asserted by the State in opposition to Forchion’s claims.

     Under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, federal courts may not intervene in state judicial proceedings. Similarly, the Younger doctrine prevents federal court intervention in a matter when there is ongoing state court proceedings that implicate important state interests and there is an adequate opportunity to raise constitutional challenges during the state judicial proceedings. Judge Irenas held that these doctrines did not apply because proceedings before the ISP Resentencing panel are administrative rather than judicial in nature, the Panel’s decisions are not appealable in state court, and the proceedings do not provide an adequate opportunity to raise constitutional challenges.

     Judge Irenas also found that Forchion had met his burden for obtaining preliminary injunctive relief. First, Forchion had shown  that he was likely to prevail on the merits of his claim because he was clearly protected by the First Amendment. Second , his continued incarceration obviously caused irreparable harm. Third, re-instating Forchion into the ISP program would not harm the State because he would still be under supervision. Fourth granting injunctive relief was in the public interest because protecting individual rights, particularly First Amendment rights, is always for the good of society in General.

     Based on these conclusions, Judge Irenas held that Forchion must be immediately reinstated to the ISP program and further restrained New Jersey from providing 48 hours notice. See: Forchion Vs Intensive Supervised Parole, 240 F.Supp.2d 302 (D.N.J. 2003)