That doesn't mean you can express yourself in whatever way you want, in the middle of a national monument.
The judge in this case sums it up as:
Freedom of expression is limited - it has to be. Otherwise you'd have a constitutionally-protected "right" to go into someone's house and start yelling abuse at the owner. Which is pretty much what these guys did.The court determined that, despite the fact that the monument is open to the public, it is a “nonpublic forum” because it has a “solemn commemorative purpose” incompatible with the full range of free expression
The answer is “interfering with an agency function” and “demonstrating without a permit” in violation of the National Park Service Regulations, 36 C.F.R. § 7.96(g)(3)(ii)(C).
And why do you put "protestors" in quotes? They are activists, and they were protesting. They're not dancers.
Don't get me wrong, the police were clearly heavy-handed. But they were acting legally - it's simply that their methods may have been OTT.
Yes.
Yes. Because it was.
Bookmarks