Judge Blocks Anti-war March Near United Nations (Snicker Snicker)

WINS News ^ | 2/10/03

[areafiftyone]

(1010 WINS) (NEW YORK) The First Amendment rights of anti-war demonstrators have not been violated by the city's decision to block them from marching past the United Nations on Saturday, a federal judge ruled Monday.

Citing "this time of heightened security," U.S. District Judge Barbara S. Jones said the city's need to protect the public outweighs the right of demonstrators to proceed with plans to march past the UN.

"While the court recognizes the distinct importance of marching, the city's restriction on marching is not a restriction on pure speech, but rather a restriction on the manner in which plaintiff may communicate its message," Jones wrote.

The protesters will be allowed to demonstrate in a designated area near the United Nations. The demonstration is being organized by United for Peace and Justice, a coalition of anti-war groups that is sponsoring rallies throughout the world on Saturday.

The city had rejected a parade permit for Saturday's rally because police could not assure public safety for up to 100,000 people without better information from organizers, city lawyer Rachel Goldman argued in court last week.

"The First Amendment right is not absolute. The plaintiffs do not have a right to march or protest any way they want, wherever they want and how they want," Goldman said. "We don't have a general ban against protest marches in the city of New York."

Chris Dunn, a staff attorney with the New York Civil Liberties Union, argued that the city was using "a theoretical possibility something terrible is going to happen to cancel the right of people to participate in peaceful protest."

He accused the city of quietly adopting a blanket policy of refusing parade permits for certain parts of Manhattan.

The United Nations is considered an especially sensitive security landmark after it was included in 1993 as a target of terrorists who plotted to blow up five New York City landmarks. The plot was thwarted and a dozen men were eventually convicted and sentenced to lengthy prison terms.

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

A couple of ideas here:

Maybe these protesters could move their protest to King Billy Jeff's office instead?
Office of William Jefferson Clinton
55 West 125 Street
New York, New York 10027
212-348-8882
(f)212-348-9245

Or.............

They could give it up in NYC and go join the hapless human shields.

[FreeTheHostages]

Yes, or they could protest in front of the Metropolitan Correctional Center and make it easy for the cops to round them up.

[Sangamon Kid]

If we believe that any constitutional right can be suspended when any low level government hack declares "In the name of security" then we have completely surrendered to the big government types.

Finally someone with common sense on this thread. Unfortunatley it will be shouted down by the psuedo-patriots who want Iraqi blood.

[concerned about politics]

Finally someone with common sense on this thread. Unfortunatley it will be shouted down by the psuedo-patriots who want Iraqi blood.

The left has blamed America first, and has Islamic members as part of their Communist protest teasm. If I worked at the UN, I'd demand security as well.
I wouldn't want pro-terrorist protestors near the building either.
It's more a case of common sence. I'm sure the FBI and CIA have checked this group out.
There's all kinds of "Hate America first" kooks there. How could anyone NOT want them pushed back a little? They can still protest, but they need to stand out of "attack" range.
Makes sence to me! Who knows how far these nuts will go. They're clinically insane.

[finnman69]

ROFL. I love it.

In all seriousness, a large antiwar march would seem to be an ideal target for a terrorist strike. Tons of media coverage, lots of bodies. And the pinheaded America haters would still love Saddam and Al Qaeda!

" We understand their anger with us and want to give them a hug"

I saw the swat team police with MP-5's and shotguns outside the Temple Emannuel on 5th avenue this weekend. NYPD is on high alert and I bet they told the city they cannot guaranteee the safety of a huge mass of protesters, nor can they guarantee the safety of the UN with a large group in front of it.

[TD911]

Maybe they could protest at Ground Zero that should make for some stunning tv.

[finnman69]

Im pretty sick of these idiots sticking their anti-American march Feb 15th stickers everywhere. I carry a pocket knife around so I can peel/scrape these things off wherever I see one.

[hellinahandcart]

"In the name of security", will be the death call of our constitutional rights.

How about "in the name of the budget"? I forgot the total cost to NYC for the WEF protests in Feb. 2002, but it was a hefty amount.

And I just heard today that the tab for the last big antiwar rally (DC, Jan. 18) was 9 million dollars.

Free speech sure costs a lot, depending on who is speaking. I'm not cheering, but I also don't see why I should have to choose between fully subsidizing their speech with my tax dollars or opting to have NO security at these things, allow the marchers to shut down the city or riot at will, and hope the responding policeman are able to pick the offenders out of a mob of 100,00 after the fact.

[BureaucratusMaximus]

"In the name of security", will be the death call of our constitutional rights. If we believe that any constitutional right can be suspended when any low level government hack declares "In the name of security" then we have completely surrendered to the big government types.

Bump!

[BureaucratusMaximus]

Free speech sure costs a lot, depending on who is speaking.

BS. If speech morphs into criminal activity...then prosecute and punish the a-holes like criminals. That way...you'd have a less a-hole protesters. Incompetence and inability to enforce laws already on the books is not an excuse to curb free speech.

[cake_crumb]

"Free speech sure costs a lot, depending on who is speaking. I'm not cheering, but I also don't see why I should have to choose between fully subsidizing their speech with my tax dollars or opting to have NO security at these things, allow the marchers to shut down the city or riot at will, and hope the responding policeman are able to pick the offenders out of a mob of 100,00 after the fact."

BUMP!!

Of course, those yelling about Constitutional rights care no more about such simple logic than they do about the fact that the protestors will STILL be allowed to protest. They're already off in "Big Brother is out to get us all mode already." I don't think any of them noticed that the protest will go on as scheduled.

[hellinahandcart]

You cannot have the arrests unless you have the security forces present, and they have to be paid whether a riot breaks out or not.

All because these people aren't satisfied with the numbers they can pull in locally, and have to bus people in from all over the country to clog up our streets.

Come to think of it, I'm not even subsidizing free speech. I'm subsidizing a radical-left media event.

[Flyer]

Bump!

---

Operation Infinite FReep Nation Wide Feb. 15th !!

[hellinahandcart]

I would love to see this happen, even though (cough!) that costs a lot of money too..

Unfortunately these cases are usually dismissed for lack of evidence. How can even the police be reasonably sure they've nabbed the right rioter if they weren't RIGHT THERE to see the windows smashed and the cars set on fire?

The culprits nearly always get away with it.

Though I suppose this problem could be solved by putting cameras everywhere...would you like that better? ;D

[Teacher317]

Citing "this time of heightened security," U.S. District Judge Barbara S. Jones said the city's need to protect the public outweighs the right of demonstrators to proceed with plans to march past the UN.

What is it about going near the UN that is inherently dangerous for the public? Hmmmm? ;^)

[areafiftyone]

The stench!

[areafiftyone]

I've seen them too and with the headgear they are pretty awesome looking! I am glad they can't march because on a Saturday there aren't that many people around the U.N. as there are during the week. They won't get that much exposure (except by the liberal media - and thats only if nothing major happens in the news on that day) and now most of the New Yorkers can avoid them if they are in one place. Just checked the weather for Saturday - Cloudy with a chance of snow. Low 20's.

[cake_crumb]

"The stench!"

SECOND HAND B.O.!! Bloomie should make a law...

[amused]

These same people screaming about the 1st amendment in being regulated to a rally instead of a march, have no issue whatsoever with using government sanction via RICO to shut down pro-lifers.

[Britton J Wingfield]

If we're lucky, it would fall on them.

Let them go then! I'll pass out crowbars.