bcla
On our rugged Eastern foothills.....
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2012
No - they were blocking vehicle traffic and not specifically foot traffic. I can’t say they could have walked around the barriers, but it heard that’s why they chose this route.I appreciate your response but I have a couple questions.
What does that mean that “There’s a basic principle that protests for current events don’t require a permit”? They are either required, or they’re not. Simply not enforcing it doesn’t mean that it’s not required.
Their are a lot of laws like this and it rubs me the wrong way, but that’s a discussion for another day.
To your second statement-
So if I’m understanding you correctly, you are saying that the police knew about it, blocked the area off from traffic where they were going, but the protestors decided to go around the police blockade and go through a neighborhood where they were not suppose to go.
As for not having a permit, that’s often the case. The Mayor doxxed the letter writers two days earlier.
The bottom line, then, seems to be this: first, the First Amendment bars cities from imposing any notice requirement for a truly spontaneous demonstration, meaning that participants cannot be punished for participating in an unlawful assembly. Second, participants who commit ordinary traffic offenses, assaults, or trespasses can be punished for doing so, though often it will be unwise for city officials to attempt to do so. Third, assessing costs, while per- haps constitutionally permissible, will be almost impossible in practice.