But these people are still allowed to make their speech, just not in the time place and manner of their chosing. Seperating people for content is already accepted and has been in common practice since the first time a protest drew a counter-protest. As long as they still get to make their speech no rights have been vioated. If they turn themselves into a public nuissance then all the laws that allow people to get arrested for being a public nuissance apply, you don't get special dispensation from existing laws because you're holding a sign.
I didn't say it's good. I said it does not violate the First Ammendment, and that's obvious to any but the most pathetic axe grinder.
If they turn themselves into a public nuissance then all the laws that allow people to get arrested for being a public nuissance apply
The policy in effect holds that dissent in itself is a public nuissance. That doesn't fly in a free country and is completely contrary to the 1st Amendment.
Why won't you hold "your guy" to higher standards than the Clintons? I'd be ashamed if my candidate did the same. I'd be writing a letter politely asking him to honor free speech, not arguing with people that are trying to keep this country free.