“Is your claim that closing off a public accommodation to a group of people is a first amendment violation?”
If the government is trying to use prior restraint to prevent a group of people from assembling, yes, that is generally a first amendment violation.
“You didn’t respond to the Mall of America v. BLM example, which prevents an assembly of BLM at Mall of America, and only at Mall of America. BLM can spout off someplace else.”
You said that Mall of America requested that, not the government, so that example doesn’t seem to be relevant at all. If the government isn’t the one trying to prevent the assembly, then it isn’t a first amendment issue.
“My contention (which you claim is a first amendment violation) is that this would have been legal before the violence started. The government claims to have probable cause of gang criminal conspiracy.”
Remember, this was a COCI sponsored event, not a Bandidos event. Even if the government had evidence that the Bandidos or other groups were conspiring to commit violence, that wouldn’t necessarily have helped them convince a court to deny 1st amendment protected rights to an ostensibly separate organization.
There is no attempt to keep them from assembling. You have a comprehension problem, or you are a dishonest hack. I pick dishonest hack.
-- Remember, this was a COCI sponsored event, not a Bandidos event. Even if the government had evidence that the Bandidos or other groups were conspiring to commit violence, that wouldn't necessarily have helped them convince a court to deny 1st amendment protected rights to an ostensibly separate organization. --
The sponsor isn't relevant. The police claim to be trying to prevent Cossacks and Bandidos from interacting, and are pointing the finger because they dropped the ball.
In addition, if the government has evidence that the Bandidos or other groups were conspiring to commit violence, that is enough, on its own, to arrest and indict. Is that a first amendment violation too? ROTFL.