Dearborn Police Accused of Violating First Amendment
Free Speech Rights Challenged at Arab International Festival
This article documents First Amendment controversies in Dearborn, Michigan around 2010, involving Christian missionaries and police at the Arab International Festival. These incidents sparked ongoing debates about free speech, religious expression, and public order.
Dearborn, Michigan — home to one of the largest Arab-American populations in the United States — became a flashpoint for First Amendment debates when police were accused of violating the free speech rights of Christian missionaries attempting to proselytize at the annual Arab International Festival.
The Incidents
Multiple confrontations between Christian missionaries and Dearborn police at the Arab International Festival led to arrests, lawsuits, and national media attention:
The Core Dispute
The controversy centered on competing claims:
Missionaries’ Claims
- First Amendment protects their right to share their religious beliefs in public spaces
- The festival occurred on public streets, not private property
- Police selectively enforced rules against Christian speech
- Arab Festival received favorable treatment from the city
City/Police Position
- Festival organizers had permits and could set rules for the event
- Missionaries were causing disruptions and potential safety issues
- Officers were maintaining public order, not suppressing speech
- Missionaries were seeking confrontation, not dialogue
The 2010 Arrests and Trial
The most high-profile incident occurred in June 2010 when four members of Acts 17 Apologetics were arrested and charged with disturbing the peace:
After a jury trial, all four defendants were acquitted. The jury found that their conduct — having conversations and filming at a public festival — did not constitute a breach of peace.
Legal Aftermath
The acquittals opened the door to civil rights lawsuits against the city:
Federal Lawsuit Outcomes
In subsequent federal litigation, Dearborn settled lawsuits with various groups, paying substantial damages and agreeing to policy changes regarding free speech at public events. The settlements affirmed that public festivals on city streets must allow reasonable expressive activity.
Broader First Amendment Issues
The Dearborn cases raised important questions about free speech in diverse communities:
- Public Forums: When city streets are used for festivals, what speech restrictions are permissible?
- Content Neutrality: Can authorities restrict religious proselytizing while allowing other types of speech?
- Competing Rights: How do free speech rights interact with the rights of event organizers and attendees?
- Police Discretion: What guidelines should officers follow when speakers are controversial but not violent?
The Community Context
Dearborn has the highest concentration of Arab-Americans in the United States, making it a unique cultural center:
The Arab International Festival was a celebration of Arab culture and heritage that attracted visitors from across the country. The presence of missionaries who explicitly sought to convert Muslims created tension that festival organizers argued disrupted the event’s purpose.
Different Perspectives
Lessons and Precedent
The Dearborn cases established important precedents for free speech at public events:
- Public festivals on city streets cannot exclude speakers based on viewpoint
- Police must have clear, content-neutral guidelines for maintaining order
- Offensive or controversial speech is protected unless it creates immediate danger
- Citizens who believe their speech rights are violated can seek legal remedy
Ongoing Relevance
The tension between free expression and community harmony continues to play out in various contexts across America. The Dearborn cases remain relevant to debates about:
- Campus free speech policies
- Social media moderation
- Public protest regulations
- Religious expression in public spaces
Know Your Rights
The ACLU’s Know Your Rights guide provides information about free speech protections and how to respond if you believe your rights are being violated.