ACLU Sues to Force Secret Service to Permit Anti-Bush Protestors to Get Closer to the President

CNN ^ | CNN

[FreeTheHostages]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The American Civil Liberties Union asked the federal courts Tuesday to prevent the U.S. Secret Service from keeping anti-Bush protesters far away from presidential appearances while allowing supporters to display their messages up close.

The civil liberties group filed the lawsuit in federal court in Pennsylvania on behalf of four advocacy organizations that claimed that the Secret Service forced them into protest zones or other areas where they could not be seen by President Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney or be noticed by the media covering their visits.

[AppyPappy]

Not true. Protesters are always put in designated areas by the Secret Service. That's what they did to us.

[AppyPappy]

Your message is still heard. It's a matter of how close you are to the President.

[Calpernia]

>>>>why can't the hundreds of conservative, reasonable, civile rights law firms all combine to become a reasonable force?

BUMP! I want this too! I think we can be a stronger force as FR. I can implement a funding system for it too.

[Your Nightmare]

Not true. Protesters are always put in designated areas by the Secret Service. That's what they did to us.

Huh? If people are put in designated areas based on their message (protestors out of sight, supporter up front for the cameras) then your right to free speech is being limited by the content of your message.

[Your Nightmare]

Your message is still heard. It's a matter of how close you are to the President.

How far away would they have to move you before you believed your message was no longer being heard? Give me an actual distance. 100ft, 500yds, 1 mile, 2 miles, 10 miles?

If they moved protestors to Siberia, would that be violating their rights to free speech?

[CaptRon]

Actually, I was going to add that to my post. You would however, keep those overtly in opposition the farthest away, wouldn't you?

[vikingcelt]

I am so sick and tired of these obnoxious, arrogant, odious freaks. I saw one on television last night talking about how "they decided" to give the people of California back their rights by not interfering with the Ninth Circuit Court's decision to "allow" the recall election to proceed. She was unbelievably vile and unbelievably arrogant.

[bc2]

The money comes from stupid white liberals in every community in America.

The enemy is us.

[AppyPappy]

When we protested, we were close enough for him to see us and us to see him. There is no magic number. In theory maybe.

[myrabach]

I cannot believe this! When I ... for reasons too numerous for this thread... saw Clinton when he was in Philly, I was close enough to hear him tell the secret service to get rid of the protestors in the back. In 5 minutes, they were GONE. Not only did he keep them at a distance, but he kept them out of the area.

And now... grrrrrrrrrr, gritting my teeth.

[sport]

The alcu hopes that President Bush will be assinated.

[sport]

The alcu was founded by Jewish Communists lawyers.

Its goal was and has always ben the total and complete destruction of the United States of America.

I have more respect for bill and hillary clinton with ted kennedy thrown to boot than I do for a alcu member.

[freeeee]

Protesters are always put in designated areas by the Secret Service.

And supporters...?

The content of one's speech cannot be criteria for different treatment under the First Amendment. This is especially true for political speech.

[AppyPappy]

Of course it can. They do it all the time.

[FreeTheHostages]

Correct, content can't determine placement.

Proposensity toward/intent to commit violence *can* determine placement.

[FreeTheHostages]

"They do it all the time."

If by this you mean the Secret Service routinely shields the president from people whose hate-filled speech repeatedly wishes violence upon the president, yes, not only do they do it all the time, it's pretty much their *job* to run interference between the President and such people. And God bless them for doing it.

[freeeee]

Of course it can. They do it all the time.

Sure they do. They violate the Constitution as a matter of course in many areas.

The sticking point is, can they do it and adhere to the Constitution? No they most certainly cannot. I think they forget where it is they derive their office and what exactly gives them legitimacy - it is the very Constitution they swear to uphold.

[freeeee]

Proposensity toward/intent to commit violence *can* determine placement.

As it stands, protesters and dissenters are removed, and supporters are given proximity - based solely on the content of one's political speech.

I expect as much in Cuba and China. But THIS is the United States of America, and that's supposed to mean something. We are supposed to set the example to the rest of the world for liberty, and this is a prime example where instead we are learning from them.

[AppyPappy]

Funny, I don't remember the Constitution guaranteeing you access to the President. I should read up on it.

[FreeTheHostages]

You and I have a factual disagreement, it seems.

I agree with you that it would be wrong to remove people just because they intend to speak things that disapprove of the President.

I don't agree that's why the Secret Service is removing these groups. ANSWER=Worker's World Party, and it espouses violence. And they've practiced it. We just don't agree on whether the Secret Service has a basis to believe that this isn't just a case of some few bad apples that can be easily intercepted versus a group organized to do more than merely speak disapprovingly.

And I've seen these people in action time and again in DC and frankly, on the factual plane, I think the Secret Service has the better of it.

Cuba, China. Balderdash.