Yesterday was a banner day for Democrats in Danbury and throughout the nation. Although we witnessed something I never thought I would see in my lifetime, there were a number of memorable moments in Hat City, most notably:
Danbury native David Cappiello losing decisively losing to Chris Murphy on his home turf proving without a shadow of a doubt that lawn signs are meaningless (BTW: Please pick up your ILLEGAL lawn signs and restore Danbury's landscape)
Danbury native Mike McLachlan's losing the hometown vote to Duane Perkins by a large margin.
HUGE landside victories by Joe Taborsak and Bob Godfrey
Bob Melillo's impressive showing against Jan Geigler. Although he lost, his performance was better than that of Bernie Gallo in 06, which is good for a person who's relatively new when it comes to running for office.
Jason Bartlett's win over Bob Burke's clone in every area of the 2nd district
Although there were victories and defeats, overall the Democrats have plenty to be proud of as they increased their voting registration percentage and ran an effective campaign that focused on the accomplishments for the community.
Below are video clips from last night that I was unable to show during last night's live video stream.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
