By: Brendan Kearney

As the The Daily Record’s city courts reporter, I’m quite familiar with the rigors (and failings) of courthouse security. I’ve had to empty my pockets and remove my belt countless times and, occasionally, I’ve had to run back to the office or to my car to drop off whatever prohibited electronic device I happened to be carrying. So I understand the hassle. But hassle isn’t usually grounds for a successful federal civil rights lawsuit, as a federal judge reminded an aggrieved Prince Frederick man earlier this month.

According to Harold Hodge Jr.’s suit, the trouble began on April 9 when he attempted to enter the Calvert County government building that hosts the district court. A guard manning the metal detector told Hodge to remove his belt and leave his cell phone outside. Hodge protested, citing the 1968 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Terry v. Ohio, but eventually complied with both requests. A similar series of events played out on several other occasions at the district court building and at the circuit court nearby before Hodge eventually filed suit on Aug. 30.

Among his constitutional claims, Hodge alleged a violation of his First Amendment rights as a result of the cell phone ban. He requested an injunction against the courthouses’ policies and claimed $77,000 in damages — just more than the federal court’s jurisdictional threshold of $75,000.

Judge Roger W. Titus summarily dismissed the suit on Oct. 14.

“Contrary to Hodge’s assertions, there is no First Amendment ‘right to communication’ that guarantees a right to carry cellular phones in government buildings,” Titus wrote. “While it may be true that Hodge was inconvenienced or perhaps uncomfortable with the security measures, the facts presented do not suggest a violation of constitutional magnitude.”

A few comments/suggestions:

• Maybe Hodge, 44, could open a franchise of this Towson cafe? (According to court papers, he was unemployed at the time of the action.)
• Or maybe he can join forces with Michael Roberts, the pilot who refused a TSA body scan the day after Titus’ opinion and was not allowed to board his plane, to fight against intrusive security measures?
• In the unlikely event that Judge Titus is wrong, and some appellate court revives Hodge’s claim, I just might have to get in on his act. If four or five unpleasant experiences at a courthouse metal detector are worth $77,000, I’m owed at least a couple million. Like I said, unlikely.