Font Size: 
Ex-Virginia Assistant AG Wins First Amendment Case Involving 'Mail-Order Bride'
The National Law Journal
February 20, 2009
A former Virginia assistant attorney general who found a foreign bride through the Internet and lost a custody battle for their child because of alleged domestic abuse has won a First Amendment argument in a Washington state appeals court.
A three-judge panel ruled on Wednesday that a family court order prohibiting former Assistant Attorney General Anthony P. Meredith from contacting any government agency regarding his ex-wife's immigration status was an unlawful prior restraint on his free speech rights.
The state appeals court found that while it disagreed with Meredith's "vitriolic and incendiary language" during custody proceedings, the family court order requiring him to obtain court approval before speaking with any agency about his wife was unconstitutional.
Meredith served as an assistant attorney general from 1998 to 2007, according to a spokesman for Virginia Attorney General Bob McDowell. Meredith currently lives in Irvine, Calif., according to court papers, but could not be reached for comment.
The decision in In re the Marriage of Meredith, No. 37098-1-II (Wash. Ct. App.), stems from the 10-month marriage between Meredith and Jazmin Muriel. When Meredith was 37 years old and working as an assistant attorney general, he sought a foreign bride on the Internet and contacted Muriel from Colombia, who was 16 at the time, according to the decision. When she turned 18, she moved to Virginia and married Meredith.
After 10 months, Muriel, pregnant at the time, "fled" to Washington and petitioned for divorce, citing alleged domestic violence, the decision stated.
A mental health examiner deemed Meredith "dangerous" during a protracted custody battle for the daughter, Daliana. The court eventually granted custody to Muriel and restricted Meredith's visitation with their daughter. In a separate order, the court prohibited Meredith from contacting the Department of Homeland Security, the Executive Office of Administrative Review, the Department of State or any other agency about his ex-wife's immigration status.
The appeals court decision rejected Meredith's argument that the family court judge was biased, but it nevertheless ruled in favor of his First Amendment argument.
"Here, it is possible that Meredith would make harassing or libelous statements about Muriel if he contacted a government agency regarding her immigration status," the decision stated. "But the First Amendment's petition clause prohibits courts from denying a citizen access to the government based on speculation that the citizen will use such access in order to harass or commit libel."
The panel ordered the lower court to "craft a more narrowly tailored order" to avoid the free speech problem.
Meredith represented himself in the appeal. Muriel was represented by the law firm of McKinley Irvin in Seattle.
