Get in touch
SOUTH JERSEY
PHILADELPHIA
FLORIDA

Eric Mays……. A true voice for the people of Flint and victim of First Amendment Rights Violation

Joseph Cannizzo • Apr 28, 2023

As the ancient Greek political philosopher Plato wrote in his seminal work, the Republic, “One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” It is a sentiment that is as true today as it was in the days of ancient Greece.


Today, however, in the city of Flint, Michigan, there is a politician who is trying to participate in the political process – trying to be a voice for the people he was elected to represent – but who, unfortunately, is being denied the opportunity to do so by some of those very “inferiors” that Plato wrote about. That brave politician is Flint City Councilman Eric Mays.


Mays was first elected to his seat on the Flint City Council in 2013, winning his election over candidate Anita Brown to represent the City’s 1st Ward. The 1st Ward is located to the far north of Flint, roughly from Clio Road to the west to Saginaw Street to the east, and from Carpenter Road to the north and Person Road to the south. Four years later, Councilman Mays defeated Brown a second time.


In 2021, Councilman Mays was re-elected for a third term.


Despite Councilman Mays’ clear popularity with his Genesee County constituency, Mays is far less popular with many of his fellow City Councilmembers. Councilman Mays has repeatedly faced censorship from his fellow Councilmembers, with the Council even going so far as to refuse Mays reentry into the Council meeting chamber after excusing himself to use the lavatory.


This unjust censorship of Mays came to a head just over a year ago, on April 25, 2022, when he was ordered to leave a City Council meeting by Council President Allie Herkenroder, after she claimed he had left his seat and returned without permission. Mays was subsequently removed from the meeting by police who escorted him from the meeting in handcuffs.


Mays was subsequently charged with a disorderly conduct misdemeanor in connection with the event, however, even the Genesee County 67th Judicial District Court Judge Vikki Bayeh-Haley who sentenced Mays stated during the sentencing that, “He was right. He did have the right to stay in [his] seat. The City Council made the wrong ruling.”


Despite Council President Herkenroder claiming that Councilman Mays left his seat and attempted to return without permission, video from the City Council meeting showed that Mays specifically asked Herkenroder if he could be excused.


“May I ask to be excused? Because you won’t get the pleasure of throwing me out,” Mays asked.


“Yes, you may be excused,” Herkenroder replied.


Given the exchange, Judge Bayeh-Haley remarked at the sentencing that, “Whether [President Herkenroder] intended to lie or was mistaken... [Mays] did have permission to leave and return.”


About the Flint City Council, Judge Bayeh-Haley remarked, “Ideally, I would like to have some type of coach or person come in and work with the entire council to try to teach them how to work together. It would be nice if they could do that on their own.”

But “working together” does not appear to a primary objective for many of the members on the Flint City Council, including members Ladel Lewis, Judy Priestley, Eva Worthing, Dennis Pfeiffer, and Council President Herkenroder, who continue to attempt to censor Councilman Mays.


Last month, in March 2023, Councilman Mays decided to take action. Realizing that the silencing of his voice by his fellow Councilmembers was really the silencing of the hundreds of voices of his constituents, Councilman Mays retained our office, Lento Law Group, P.C., to combat this unjust and unconstitutional abridgement of not only his First Amendment rights, but the ongoing disenfranchisement of those citizens of the 1st Ward whom Mays has been repeatedly elected to represented.


Most recently, Councilman Mays is leading the charge to compensate those in Flint who have suffered property damage and loss as a result of the City’s long-standing sewage backup problem. Mays plans to bring forth a Resolution which will expedite the claims process and ensure sufficient funds are held in reserve to continue to pay damage claims in connection with the ongoing sewage backup issue. 


This is just one of the ways in which Council Mays is fighting for the people of Flint, not just within the 1st Ward, but overall. Even so, his fellow City Councilmembers seem intent on continuing to try to shut Mays down at every turn.


But in retaining Lento Law Group, P.C. – which only last month sent Cease & Desist letters to several of the City Councilmembers who have been repeatedly and flagrantly encroaching on Councilman Mays’ rights – Councilman Mays is making perfectly clear that the battle for the soul of Flint has only just begun, and he has no intention of backing down.

More News & Resources

By Joseph D. Lento 03 May, 2024
Nurses facing abuse or other misconduct charges over inappropriate patient restraint need skilled defense representation.
By Lawrence A. Katz 26 Apr, 2024
The news has recently had almost daily stories about the social media app, Tik Tok, and Congress’ threat to make using it illegal unless its ownership is transferred from its present Chinese owners. The argument for requiring the removal of Chinses owners is that they require access to personal and confidential information and that poses a national security risk. I have seen tech experts who question whether transferring ownership will actually eliminate that threat. They suggest that if the computer code for the Tik Top app already contains a “backdoor” enabling the secret access to information, changing ownership will not correct the problem. This blog is not intended to discuss those issues. Instead, we will address the claims by many that preventing people from using Tik Tok is a First Amendment free speech violation. I suggest that it is not. This is a tidbit to keep for your next Trivia Night. The First Amendment was originally only intended to prohibit the federal government from interfering with free speech. It was not until 1925, in Gitlow v. New York, that the United States Supreme Court held that the First Amendment prohibited all levels of government (states and local governments) from interfering with free speech. A government can limit speech if doing so is content neutral. As the United States Supreme Court has explained, “A regulation of speech is facially content based under the First Amendment if it ‘target[s] speech based on its communicative content’—that is, if it ‘applies to particular speech because of the topic discussed or the idea or message expressed.’” City of Austin v. Reagan Nat'l Advert. of Austin, LLC, 596 U.S. 61 (2022). Thus, where a transit system prohibited all advertisements on its premises, the Court held that the limit was constitutional because it applied to all subjects and opinions. In contrast, a limitation on a single message is not permitted. In Ctr. for Investigative Reporting v. SEPTA, 975 F.3d 300, 303 (3d Cir. 2020), a Court of Appeals ruled against a public transit agency’s refusal to accept advertisements that were political or discussed matters of public debate. The regulation was not content neutral. The prohibition against Tik Tok would likely be found constitutional because the prohibition is not based on a specific subject or viewpoint. There is one other issue that must be raised --- it is highly unlikely that a government could prohibit all means of public forums for speech. Even if content neutral, it is unlikely that a government could prohibit all social media any more than it could prohibit all newspapers. However, in the case of Tik Tok, prohibiting it from operating in the United States does not effectively prohibit all means of public forums as several other social media platforms still exist. Thus, the often-voiced opinion that eliminating Tik Tok denies its users their First Amendment rights is inaccurate.
By Joseph Cannizzo Jr 26 Apr, 2024
While dogs are often referred to as “man’s best friend,” dogs can also be dangerous, and even the friendliest of dogs may bite when provoked. This this blog post we will discuss some general legal theory about animal bites, including dog bites, and outline what you should do if you were bit by another person’s dog or other animal. Can I Sue for a Dog Bite? Before I answer this question, it is important to understand the legal theory that undergirds animal bite cases. The law classically categorized animals into two categories: domitae naturae – meaning, those animals that are classically domesticated or tamed – and ferae naturae – meaning, those animals that are classically feral, wild, or exotic. This distinction is significant legally because, generally speaking, those who possess a ferae naturae animal – for example, a tiger – do so at their own peril. This is because if ferae naturae animal bites another person, the owner of the animal is generally presumed to be at-fault. While the owner of a domitae naturae animal can also be held liable for the actions of that animal, generally, a bite by such an animal – for example, a cat or a dog – may not necessarily give rise to a presumption of fault. At least, that was the classical framework. This has been changed by individual laws in many states. Most states have adopted a strict-liability standard in connection with dog bites. This means that a biting dog’s owner will be held liable for injuries caused by the dog, even if the owner used reasonable care to restrain the dog or to protect or warn the other party. Often, this strict-liability view can be viewed as harsh, if one adheres to the “accidents happen” mentality. In recognition of the potentially harsh outcomes strict-liability may bring about, a handful of other states have adopted a “One-Bite Rule”. In essence, a One-Bite Rule is a law that provides that a dog owner may only be held liable if they knew or should have known that the dog has a vicious propensity or is prone to bite, and that owner would only have such knowledge if the dog has bitten someone in the past. In other words, the One-Bite Rule is called this because the owner of a dog with a propensity to bite essentially gets their first bite free because the owner will likely not be found liable for the first bite. This is consistent with the notion of the “foreseeability of the harm” that undergirds much of tort law – in other words, how could the owner foresee that his or her dog would bite if it has never done so before? Conversely, the owner should know, and should therefore be held liable, if the dog has bitten someone before. So, to answer the question of whether you can sue if you have been bitten by a dog, the answer, generally is yes, but the merits of you claim will depend largely on whether you live in a strict-liability state or a One-Bite Rule state. What Do I Do If I Have Been Bitten? While you may, of course, be panicked immediately following a dog bite, it is important to do the following: · Call 911 to report the incident. Make sure a police report is filed, and get a copy of it. · Get the dog owner’s name and contact information, if possible. · Try to get a picture of the dog and the owner, if possible. · Take pictures of the bite wounds while they are still fresh. · Go seek medical treatment, if necessary, and try to leave the appointment with a copy of your medical record in connection with the visit. · Contact a knowledgeable personal injury lawyer as soon as possible. If you or a loved one have been injured by a public actor or public entity, call the Lento Law Group today. Our team of knowledgeable and compassionate attorneys and support staff can help guide you while you work to pick up the pieces after a traumatic accident. Call Lento Law Group today at (856) 652-2000. We will fight to get you the recovery you deserve.
By Joseph Cannizzo Jr. 26 Apr, 2024
By Joseph Cannizzo Jr. July 2023
By Jeanilou G.T. Maschhoff 26 Apr, 2024
By Jeanilou G.T. Maschhoff, Esquire • 20 April, 2024
By Jeanilou G.T. Maschhoff 26 Apr, 2024
By Jeanilou G.T. Maschhoff, Esquire • 06 April, 2024
08 Mar, 2024
By Jeanilou G.T. Maschhoff, Esquire • 06 March, 2024
08 Mar, 2024
By Lawrence A. Katz, Esquire • 07 Feb, 2024
08 Mar, 2024
Professional discipline in one state can affect a professional license in another state. Don’t run. Get help up front.
01 Mar, 2024
ERIC HAKEEM DEONTAYE MAYS, late Councilman Eric Mays's son and only next of kin, along with Bishop Patrick Munnerlyn, Community Outreach Specialist for the Lento Law Group, cordially invites the Flint community to a candlelight vigil to honor the remarkable life and legacy of Councilman Eric B. Mays. The vigil will take place on Saturday, March 2, at 6:00 PM in front of Flint City Hall, as we come together to celebrate a true hero of Flint, a relentless champion for the community, a visionary leader, a devoted public servant, and a cherished friend. Councilman Mays was a beacon of hope and strength for Flint, advocating tirelessly for the rights and well-being of its residents. His unwavering dedication to serving the community has left an indelible mark on the hearts of all who had the privilege of knowing him. As we gather to remember his remarkable contributions, let us light candles in unity to illuminate the path he paved toward a brighter future for Flint. This vigil is an opportunity for us to reflect on the profound impact of Councilman Mays’ work, to share stories of his courage and kindness, and to reaffirm our commitment to the values he embodied. Participants are welcome to bring their own candles, but candles will also be provided (as long as supplies last) to ensure that everyone can join in this act of remembrance and solidarity. Councilman Mays’ love for the people of Flint was boundless, and in return, he was deeply loved and respected by the community he served. As we mourn his passing, we also celebrate the legacy of a man who dedicated his life to making Flint a better place for all its residents. It has indeed been a sad week in Flint, but let us come together to honor a man who gave so much of himself to our city. Join us in front of Flint City Hall to pay tribute to Councilman Eric B. Mays, a man who deserves the best: our collective love, respect, and admiration. We invite everyone to come and show their support by standing in solidarity as we remember a great man who has left an everlasting mark on our community. Atlanta, GA • Birmingham, AL • Boulder, CO • Coral Springs, FL • Detroit, MI • El Paso, TX • Flint, MI • Honolulu, HI • Los Angeles, CA • Maui, HI Miami, FL • Mount Laurel, NJ • Newark, NJ • New York, NY • Orlando, FL • Philadelphia, PA • Puerta Plata, DR •Richmond, VA • Salt Lake City, UT San Juan, PR • Scottsdale, AZ • Washington, DC 
More Posts
Share by: