The ACLU filed a brief yesterday in support of Idaho Senator Larry Craig, arguing that those engaging in sexual conduct in restroom stalls should be able to expect privacy.
The AP reports: “[The ACLU] cited a Minnesota Supreme Court ruling 38 years ago that found that people who have sex in closed stalls in public restrooms ‘have a reasonable expectation of privacy.' That means the state cannot prove Craig was inviting an undercover officer to have sex in public, the ACLU wrote…The ACLU argued that even if Craig was inviting the officer to have sex, his actions wouldn't be illegal. ‘The government cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Senator Craig was inviting the undercover officer to engage in anything other than sexual intimacy that would not have called attention to itself in a closed stall in the public restroom,' the ACLU wrote in its brief. The ACLU also noted that Craig was originally charged with interference with privacy, which it said was an admission by the state that people in the bathroom stall expect privacy.”
Aside from the sheer absurdity of it, I'm not sure exactly how this argument would help Craig, since he has denied engaging in any sexual conduct.
Last week Craig filed a 27-page brief with the Minnesota Court of Appeals in an ongoing attempt to withdraw his guilty plea.
Previously
Larry Craig Files Appeal in Ongoing Quest to Withdraw Guilty Plea [tr]
A Holiday Visit to the Larry Craig Men's Room [tr]
Idaho Paper Out to Disprove Larry Craig's “I'm not gay” Claims [tr]
