Free speech zone

From Free net encyclopedia

Free speech zones (also known as First Amendment Zones and Free speech cages) are areas set aside in public places for political activists to exercise their right of free speech in the United States. Although such zones existed earlier, instituted by the Clinton administration, they gained more attention after the WTO Meeting of 1999 and have been used vigorously by the George W. Bush administration. They were also used aggressively at the Democratic National Convention in 2004, which drew criticism in comparison to the Republican National Convention of the same year that left protestors free to protest in the streets. Civil libertarians claim that they are used as a form of censorship and public relations management to conceal opposition from the public and elected officials.[1] There is much controversy surrounding the creation of these areas — the mere existence of such zones is offensive to some people, who maintain that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution makes the entire country an unrestricted free speech zone. [2]. The Department of Homeland Security "has even gone so far as to tell local police departments to regard critics of the war on terrorism as potential terrorists themselves." [3]

Prominent examples of recent free speech zones are those set up by the Secret Service who scout locations where the president is to pass through or speak. Officials target those who carry anti-Bush signs and escort them to the free speech zones prior to and during the event. Reporters are often barred by local officials from displaying on camera or speaking to protestors within the zone.Template:Citeneeded Protestors who refuse to go to the free speech zone are often arrested and charged with trespassing, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.[4][5] A seldom-used federal law makes it unlawful to "willfully and knowingly to enter or remain in ... any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting" has also been invoked. [6][7]

1 Legality
2 Notable incidents
3 Criticisms
4 In Fiction
5 External links

[edit]

Legality

The Supreme Court has ruled that picketing and marching in public areas has some degree of protection under the First Amendment, but less than that afforded to pure speech due to the physical externalities it creates. Regulations for such activities, however, may not target the content of the expression.

[edit]

Notable incidents

"These [Free Speech] zones routinely succeed in keeping protesters out of presidential sight and outside the view of media covering the event. When Bush came to the Pittsburgh area on Labor Day 2002, 65-year-old retired steel worker Bill Neel was there to greet him with a sign proclaiming, 'The Bush family must surely love the poor, they made so many of us.' The local police, at the Secret Service's behest, set up a 'designated free-speech zone' on a baseball field surrounded by a chain-link fence a third of a mile from the location of Bush's speech. The police cleared the path of the motorcade of all critical signs, though folks with pro-Bush signs were permitted to line the president's path... Police detective John Ianachione testified that the Secret Service told local police to confine 'people that were there making a statement pretty much against the president and his views'"[8]

At another incident in South Carolina, Brett Bursey was singled out as the one person in a crowd of thousands with a sign protesting George Bush's arrival. When he refused an order to go to the free speech zone half-a-mile away, he was arrested and charged with trespassing by the South Carolina police. "Bursey said that he asked the policeman if 'it was the content of my sign, and he said, 'Yes, sir, it's the content of your sign that's the problem.'" However, those tresspassing charges were dropped. Instead, Bursey was indicted by the federal government for violation of a federal law that allows the Secret Service to restrict access to areas visited by the president. Bursey faces up to six months in prison and a US$5,000 fine." [9]

[edit]

Criticisms

The Bush administration has been critized by columnist James Bovard of The American Conservative for requiring protestors to stay within a designated area, while allowing supporters access to more areas.[10] According to the Chicago Tribune, the American Civil Liberties Union has asked a federal court in Washington D.C. to prevent the Secret Service from keeping anti-Bush protesters distant from presidential appearances while allowing supporters to display their messages upclose, where they are likely to be seen by the news media.[11] Regarding free speech zones, U. S. District Court Judge Douglas Woodlock has commented that "One cannot conceive of what other design elements could be put into a space to create a more symbolic affront to the role of free expression." [12]

The preliminary plan for the Democratic National Convention was criticized by the National Lawyers Guild and the ACLU of Massachusetts as being insufficient to handle the size of the expected protest. According to the Boston Globe, "The zone would hold as few as 400 of the several thousand protesters who are expected in Boston in late July." [13]

[edit]