Advocacy group sues MDOT for rejecting kitten experiment ads

A Virginia-based advocacy group is suing four Maryland transportation agencies for First Amendment violations after its ads opposing experiments on kittens were rejected.

White Coat Waste Project, a right-leaning nonprofit that opposes government spending on animal experiments, is asking a U.S. District Court judge to force the Maryland Department of Transportation and the Maryland Transit Administration to place the ads on buses and trains serving the Beltsville area.

Attorneys for the Mechanicsville, Virginia-based group allege the advertising rules set by MDOT and MTA violate the First and Fourteenth amendments.

“The defendants’ policies or practices for rejecting advertisements are unreasonable because they provide defendants with unbridled discretion,” states the lawsuit, filed Wednesday in Baltimore. “Defendants’ policies or practices for rejecting advertisements are unreasonable because they are not guided by objective, workable standards to govern defendants’ decision-making.”

The group has spotlighted the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s facility in Beltsville because of ongoing testing on kittens. The group alleges  the agency kills up to 100 kittens annually at the Maryland laboratory after infecting the felines with a single-cell parasite that causes toxoplasmosis.

Earlier this year, the advocacy group founded by former Republican party strategist Anthony Bellotti, attempted to purchase space for the advertisements. The rejected advertisement features two cats in a cage accompanied with the message “Kitten slaughterhouse? Your USDA tax dollars at work in Beltsville, MD.”

The ad was rejected by state officials for being objectionable, the complaint states.

“This ad is not approved,” wrote Veronica Battisti, director of communications and marketing with MDOT and the MTA, in an email obtained by the advocacy group under the Maryland Public Information Act. “It would be considered objectionable and/or controversial on its own accord. Plus, it depicts/describes violence.”

Pages of a contract obtained by the group cite a less-specific policy that allows advertisements to be rejected six reasons including: content is about alcohol or tobacco products; false or misleading or deceptive statements; sexually explicit or obscene content; harmful to minors; depicts violence, illegal activity or anti-social behavior; contains profanity.

An advertising buyer that works with the state agency is quoted in another email obtained through a document request as saying “there wasn’t anything specifically banning political and issue related” advertisements.

The plaintiffs, who are represented locally by Curtis Cooper, a Towson solo practitioner, called the ban discriminatory.

“The display of WCW’s advertisement will cause no harm of any kind to defendants, the jurisdiction in which they operate, the passengers who ride their buses and trains, or the public who view their advertising spaces,” the complaint states.

The group is asking that the department’s policies be ruled unconstitutional and that the group be allowed to advertise on the public buses and trains.

A spokeswoman for MDOT and MTA said Thursday the agencies have not been served with a copy of the complaint but have a policy of not commenting on pending litigation.

The case is White Coat Waste Project v. Maryland Department of Transportation, et al., 1:18-cv-03035-JKB.

White Coat Waste Project also is embroiled in a separate lawsuit with the USDA involving the agency’s refusal to turn over documents requested under the Freedom of Information Act.