Sign in to follow this  
Shortforbob

Can the first amendment survive Trump?

Recommended Posts

Better get your skates on.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/12/trump-administration-plans-crackdown-on-protests-outside-white-house

 

The public has until 15 October to comment on the plans.

 
Topics

Trump administration plans crackdown on protests outside White House

The administration has suggested it could charge ‘event management’ costs for protests and close 80% of the sidewalks

 

Under the proposal introduced by Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke in August, the administration is looking to close 80% of the sidewalks surrounding the White House, and has suggested that it could charge “event management” costs, for demonstrations.

Currently the National Park Service is able to recoup costs for special events, but not spontaneous protests like the ones that typically take place in Lafayette Park across from the White House. These charges could include the cost of erecting barriers, cleaning fees, repairs to grass, permit fees and the salaries of official personnel on hand to monitor such demonstrations, all tallied at the discretion of the police.

 
 
Read more

Naturally, civil liberties groups consider the proposals an affront to the rights guaranteed under the first amendment. As the ACLU notes, such fees “could make mass protests like Martin Luther King Jr’s historic 1963 March on Washington and its ‘I have a dream’ speech too expensive to happen”.

During the Vietnam War the federal government attempted to impose similar barriers to citizens freely assembling in protest and were sued by the ACLU. In their ruling the courts reasserted the fact that “the use of parks for public assembly and airing of opinions is historic in our democratic society, and one of its cardinal values”.

The White House sidewalk, Lafayette Park, and the Ellipse were unique sites for the exercise of those rights, they ruled, and therefore they could not “accord deference to an executive approach to use of the White House sidewalk that is rooted in a bias against expressive conduct…”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can any amendment survive Democrats? This country will fall when the Constitution falls. It is Democrats peddling the BS that the Constitution is an anachronism created by Old White Racist Slave Owning Men. 

 

They want to do away with the College of electors. Some even calling to change the 2 senators per state. 

Democracy without a constitution is an elected dictatorship. Just ask Germany how that worked for them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Can any amendment survive Democrats? This country will fall when the Constitution falls. It is Democrats peddling the BS that the Constitution is an anachronism created by Old White Racist Slave Owning Men. 

 

They want to do away with the College of electors. Some even calling to change the 2 senators per state. 

Democracy without a constitution is an elected dictatorship. Just ask Germany how that worked for them?

the Uk does not have a written constitution - so far so good

 

D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

That was quick, now about this latest trump attack on your constitution?

 

The Democrats did something.  That's his response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, benwynn said:

The Democrats did something.  That's his response.

I only read it because Dylan quoted it.  Stop quoting the ass Dylan.  So Trump tries to Nullify an amendment through regulation, and Jack's response is that the Democrats are destroying the constitution.  He then (somehow) brings racism, slavery, the electroal college, and dictatorship into the discussion.  You can always tell when Jack is posting prior to the talking points coming out.  His posts are so.... memorable.... when he can't just copy from other people.  It's almost a Randumb level of topic wandering and conspiracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Grrr... said:

I only read it because Dylan quoted it.  Stop quoting the ass Dylan.  So Trump tries to Nullify an amendment through regulation, and Jack's response is that the Democrats are destroying the constitution.  He then (somehow) brings racism, slavery, the electroal college, and dictatorship into the discussion.  You can always tell when Jack is posting prior to the talking points coming out.  His posts are so.... memorable.... when he can't just copy from other people.  It's almost a Randumb level of topic wandering and conspiracy.

as an old hack I find the relationship America has developed with the truth rather alarming. Trumpism is a really unsettling phenomenon.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dylan winter said:

as an old hack I find the relationship America has developed with the truth rather alarming. Trumpism is a really unsettling phenomenon.

 

Yeah.  Go look at my topic about why the lies work the way he tells them, and how the main stream media is taking leads from him on how to tell even more lies to support his lies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The white house is the people's house maybe you think the constitution should allow a citizen to knock on the front door an be allowed in so they can protest outside the oval office? 

Protest marches already require permitting and such. This is nothing new or unconstitutional. Access to the perimiter of the white house has changes a number of times and the constitution survived just fine. 

You can always contest it in court ... Oh wait, ha ha ha  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Can any amendment survive Democrats? This country will fall when the Constitution falls. It is Democrats peddling the BS that the Constitution is an anachronism created by Old White Racist Slave Owning Men. 

 

They want to do away with the College of electors. Some even calling to change the 2 senators per state. 

Democracy without a constitution is an elected dictatorship. Just ask Germany how that worked for them?

Should people have an equal voice? Should one vote be equal to another?

Should half a million people be able to veto the choice of 40 million.  

I think thats messed up but till enough people decide it should change thats the way it'll stay. The constitution is a living document unlike the ten commandments it allows changes but only if the country comes together to amend it. Bypassing it without the express consent of the people will be challanged and ultimately fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the National Park Service is short on funds, they should close the Washington Monument.  A tried and true strategy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as eliminating the electoral college, the framers of the constitution considered the populace to ignorant to properly vote for president, and came up with this scheme to nullify the popular vote.  And it worked to perfection in 2016.  Elimination of the EC is long past due.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

The white house is the people's house maybe you think the constitution should allow a citizen to knock on the front door an be allowed in so they can protest outside the oval office? 

Protest marches already require permitting and such. This is nothing new or unconstitutional. Access to the perimiter of the white house has changes a number of times and the constitution survived just fine. 

You can always contest it in court ... Oh wait, ha ha ha  

I don't recall anyone suggesting that the general public be able to waltz up to the front door of the WH and knock.

I fully expect it will wind up in court.  In fact, it has been in prior years and was shot down.  From the OP -

1 hour ago, Shortforbob said:

During the Vietnam War the federal government attempted to impose similar barriers to citizens freely assembling in protest and were sued by the ACLU. In their ruling the courts reasserted the fact that “the use of parks for public assembly and airing of opinions is historic in our democratic society, and one of its cardinal values”.

Your last statement suggests you think the outcome is set.  Another version of "haha, we won". 

That would be legislation from the bench, which used to be a "no no" from your team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

The white house is the people's house maybe you think the constitution should allow a citizen to knock on the front door an be allowed in so they can protest...

Of course not. That's what National Wildlife Refuge Headquarters buildings are for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have been mistaken.  Perhaps the talking point memo on this little nugget of news has already been released.  Perhaps that talking point is deflection.  Because here is one of primary deflectors and distractors and he's quickly managed to get people talking about the electoral college and just about anything BUT this obvious infringement of one of our principles rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, benwynn said:

Of course not. That's what National Wildlife Refuge Headquarters buildings are for. 

Well played!  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dylan winter said:

the Uk does not have a written constitution - so far so good

 

D

Yup, the UK can bury shit without the need for a constitution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dylan winter said:

I should like to apologise to you on all counts

Apologising for what? Being a pompous arse and constantly holding up the UK as a place of virtuous behaviour, when it blatantly is not?

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/james-cusick-adam-ramsay/met-police-stall-brexit-campaign-investigations-claiming-polit

Any comments? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charging for spontaneous demonstrations?

 Who 're they gonna bill? We The people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

Charging for spontaneous demonstrations?

 Who 're they gonna bill? We The people?

The Mexicans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is that the part of the 1st that allows the Best Americans to purchase the government to rig the game in their favor will remain in place for quite some time.  The part actually protecting the right to say anything about it will become a memory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

My guess is that the part of the 1st that allows the Best Americans to purchase the government to rig the game in their favor will remain in place for quite some time.  The part actually protecting the right to say anything about it will become a memory. 

I hope you don't honestly think that.   

I *do* think a bit of a clarification in understanding is warranted nationwide, as I think that there are too many today who think that freedom of speech means that they get to quench that with which they disagree.  The freedom that we all cherish comes with the responsibility to protect it, even when the speech we hear isn't something we like.  From Trump to the whiny snots on campus protesting the appearance of speakers they think they oppose - a 5 gallon bucket of tolerance would be a good first dose. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

I hope you don't honestly think that.   

I *do* think a bit of a clarification in understanding is warranted nationwide, as I think that there are too many today who think that freedom of speech means that they get to quench that with which they disagree.  The freedom that we all cherish comes with the responsibility to protect it, even when the speech we hear isn't something we like.  From Trump to the whiny snots on campus protesting the appearance of speakers they think they oppose - a 5 gallon bucket of tolerance would be a good first dose. 

 

there are always people protesting in Lafayette Park.  I used to pass by there quite often, and not once was the place free of protesters, regardless of the hour of day or night.  It is our national pastime.  The country was founded by protest.  This whole thing is part of the get out the vote drive that operates by trying to scare people about left wing mobs, not to mention the side benefit of assuaging the tender sensibilities of the Strongest Man in the GOP, who does not like any dissent.  Want to live in that house?  Get ready for some dissent because it has always been right across the street and it always will be.  It was bad enough when they closed the street between the park and the WH, but closing the park is silly.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

there are always people protesting in Lafayette Park.  I used to pass by there quite often, and not once was the place free of protesters, regardless of the hour of day or night.  It is our national pastime.  The country was founded by protest.  This whole thing is part of the get out the vote drive that operates by trying to scare people about left wing mobs, not to mention the side benefit of assuaging the tender sensibilities of the Strongest Man in the GOP, who does not like any dissent.  Want to live in that house?  Get ready for some dissent because it has always been right across the street and it always will be.  It was bad enough when they closed the street between the park and the WH, but closing the park is silly.  

No argument, and I hope that my comments weren't understood to be opposed to protests.  I think it's vital for people to feel free to express themselves.  To clarify - I think that some who are protesting think that because they don't like what someone else has to say, that they have the right to stop them from saying it, and it's that expectation I oppose.  Anyone sitting in the Whitehouse is free to agree or disagree with the comments sent their way - they shouldn't want to curtail those comments. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

No argument, and I hope that my comments weren't understood to be opposed to protests.  I think it's vital for people to feel free to express themselves.  To clarify - I think that some who are protesting think that because they don't like what someone else has to say, that they have the right to stop them from saying it, and it's that expectation I oppose.  Anyone sitting in the Whitehouse is free to agree or disagree with the comments sent their way - they shouldn't want to curtail those comments. 

 

I'd have to see it with my own eyes to know if it really is any different than what was always there, or get some confirmation from a trusted source.  This WH, a month before an election in which their strategy is to paint the enemy as violent and criminal, is not what I call reliable.  If they are still suggesting it after the midterms, I will pay more attention to it.  

Not that i've gotten cynical as I get older or anything

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

What others rights are revocable?

Just asking.

Everything bar the right to bear arms? :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

I'd have to see it with my own eyes to know if it really is any different than what was always there, or get some confirmation from a trusted source.  This WH, a month before an election in which their strategy is to paint the enemy as violent and criminal, is not what I call reliable.  If they are still suggesting it after the midterms, I will pay more attention to it.  

Not that i've gotten cynical as I get older or anything

You reckon the WH is pulling this stunt to swing waverers their way?

Hmm maybe they could propose some 2nd executive order BS too? What they lose from their base, they gain from the kiddies..

Is the NP website still down? you've only got until Monday 15 to provide "public debate" 

more 

The Park Service measure also would make it easier for authorities to revoke demonstration permits. Currently, permits can be terminated when there is a clear and present danger to the public safety, good order or health. But the proposed regulation would allow permits to be yanked for any violation of their terms and conditions.

Critics say that would create a “hair trigger” for shutting down protests, in response to an extra table or sound system -- whether erected by activists involved in an event or counter protesters seeking to undermine it.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-12/get-off-my-lawn-trump-proposal-could-squelch-protests-in-d-c

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chew this over, Trump signs this EO a week before the election. No time for lower courts to block it.

Thus provoking a mass demonstration..that will of course be cracked down on.

Thus providing some wonderful footage of "violent and extreme" lefty (Democrat) reaction..days before the election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oooooo.  They are getting smarter.  You can no longer review the comments.  How's that for transparency?  Without the ability to review the comments the public never would have known what Bullshit pai was getting up to with the FCC comments either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this