Miriam Brysk v. Henry Herskovitz, et al.

Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit erred by holding that the use of multiple signs in front of a synagogue in Ann Arbor, Michigan, every Saturday morning for eighteen (18) years, some of which address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in combination with flagrantly anti-Semitic signs which state, “Resist Jewish Power,” “Jewish Power Corrupts,” and “No More Holocaust Movies,” is absolutely protected by the Free Speech provision of the First Amendment, and may not be restricted in any way by an injunction which places reasonable time, place and manner conditions on the protesters’ conduct.

Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, after reversing the decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan which held that Petitioner’s emotional distress did not constitute a sufficient concrete injury to afford her standing to sue, erred by proceeding to address the First Amendment free speech issue, rather than remanding the case back to the District Court in order to develop the record on the First Amendment, and other issues.

Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit erred by holding that the protesters’ conduct does not violate 42 U.S.C. § 1981, where the conduct violates the Michigan anti-stalking statute, M.C.L. § 750.41h.

Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit erred by holding that the protesters’ conduct does not violate 42 U.S.C. § 1982, where Petitioner, who is a Holocaust survivor, experiences severe emotional distress from seeing the signs, and is a dues paying member of the synagogue, by virtue of which she is a pro rata owner of the synagogue property.

Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit erred by holding that the conduct of the protesters and of the City of Ann Arbor does not violate 42 U.S.C. § 1983, where the City of Ann Arbor has had a content and viewpoint neutral sign ordinance in place which is unambiguous and which prohibits the protesters’ placing their signs in the public right-of-way in front of the synagogue, but the City of Ann Arbor has failed and refused to enforce the sign ordinance against the protesters for the entire eighteen (18) year period.

Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit erred by holding that the conduct of the protesters does not violate 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3), where the emotional distress which the signs cause Petitioner inhibits her from traveling to attend Sabbath services at the synagogue, or at its annex.