A.C.S. v. M.L.Q.T. - Amicus de ACLU Puerto Rico
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Puerto Rico asked the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, through an amicus curiae brief, to overturn a protection order issued under Law 54 against a 16-year-old minor based on events linked to a dating relationship between two students at a private school.
In its brief, the ACLU of Puerto Rico explained that applying Act No. 54 of 1989 — a statute designed to address domestic violence between adults — to romantic relationships between minors constitutes an arbitrary and capricious use of the law and turns this important remedy into an instrument of oppression wielded by adults. The organization emphasized that, in this case, the protection order caused one of the minors to miss months of in-person classes and school activities, while also subjecting the parties to a judicial process that was unnecessary and inappropriate for their age.
In the particular case, the organization argued that the lower courts failed to adequately examine the full context of the relationship between the minors, as well as the role of responsible adults. The amicus stated that the anxiety and fear expressed by one of the minors in her text messages were closely tied to fear of her own mother’s reaction upon learning about the relationship, rather than to a pattern of abuse by the other minor. However, the Court of First Instance improperly restricted attempts by legal counsel to present evidence on that point, affecting the rights to due process and confrontation.
A.C.S. v. M.L.Q.T. - Amicus de ACLU Puerto Rico
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Puerto Rico asked the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, through an amicus curiae brief, to overturn a protection order issued under Law 54 against a 16-year-old minor based on events linked to a dating relationship between two students at a private school.
In its brief, the ACLU of Puerto Rico explained that applying Act No. 54 of 1989 — a statute designed to address domestic violence between adults — to romantic relationships between minors constitutes an arbitrary and capricious use of the law and turns this important remedy into an instrument of oppression wielded by adults. The organization emphasized that, in this case, the protection order caused one of the minors to miss months of in-person classes and school activities, while also subjecting the parties to a judicial process that was unnecessary and inappropriate for their age.
In the particular case, the organization argued that the lower courts failed to adequately examine the full context of the relationship between the minors, as well as the role of responsible adults. The amicus stated that the anxiety and fear expressed by one of the minors in her text messages were closely tied to fear of her own mother’s reaction upon learning about the relationship, rather than to a pattern of abuse by the other minor. However, the Court of First Instance improperly restricted attempts by legal counsel to present evidence on that point, affecting the rights to due process and confrontation.
Stay Informed
Sign up to be the first to hear about how to take action.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU’s privacy statement.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU’s privacy statement.