Replies

Then, using your logic, cannot the federal authorities compell Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck to instruct their listening audience to not act in a violent way.

I don't know, but it is certainly an interesting point, although you've structured it only from a conservatiive standpoint. Shouldn't you include Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow in your hypothetical, too?

I think the answer would come down to the relationship of the rioters to the broadcaster. If there were a clear and obvious connection, then the broadcaster should probably comply. Of course, later, once the dust had settled, the onus would be on the peace officer to demonstrate to the court's satisfaction, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the broadcaster did, indeed, have the lawful duty to comply.

I am unfamiliar with the present law, which I'm sure varies by jurisdiction. You posted the article--can you cite chapter and verse?

By the way, this certainly touches on a biblical imperative, from Romans 13: obey the civil authorities. I think that requires a citizen (this citizen, anyway) who receives an officer's order in the heat of the moment to have a strong reason for not obeying if that is his choice.

"Shouldn't you include Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow in your hypothetical, too?"

Without question. I abhor hypocracy. I detest Olberman and Maddow and think they do a better job than anyone when acting a fool. But, I'd fight to the death to protect their right to "act the fool".

"I am unfamiliar with the present law, which I'm sure varies by jurisdiction. You posted the article--can you cite chapter and verse?"

I'm not a NY attorney, so I'm not familiar with this particular statute the police used to arrest this manager. But, I am intimately familiar with the Constitution, and whatever those NY local statutes may be, they still have to withstand judicial review with respect to the defendant's 1st Amendment protections.