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.

[FreeTheHostages]

Duly noted: these people love to sue.

[isthisnickcool]

If the ACLU loses the suit they should have to immediately pay all costs related to the suit. Every penny the taxpayers have to spend should be reimbursed.

[Bikers4Bush]

"rom keeping anti-Bush protesters far away from presidential appearances"

Key point, these people are protesting the president, not a policy or several policies but the president himself.

This alone means that any one of them could wish or plan to do him harm. The ACLU will lose this one.

[doberville]

Where does the money come from that enables the ACLU to
press all these frivolous suits?

[ClearCase_guy]

"Protecting our nation's leaders from dissent is unconstitutional."

Does the constitution speak of how close people need to come in order for their speech to be free? Or does the constitution really indicate that you can say what you want -- but silent on forcing folks to listen?

If the constitution says people have to listen to what you want to say, then I'd like time on NBC, CBS and ABC to tell people want a left-wing organization the ACLU has become.

[Cobra64]

Can someone send this to Rush. He'll have some fun with this one.

[CaptRon]

It's the job of the USSS to protect the President. I could be wrong, but wouldn't there be a greater threat posed by anti- Bush protesters than by supporters of the President?

[ctlpdad]

I don't like the ACLU nor their tactics, but i feel everybody should have similar access. Freedom of speech is the No. 1 ammendment to the constitution, right?

If i were protesting Xlinton, i would want to be as close as any Xlinton supporter, albeit with an odor removing breathing apparatus and full foul weather gear to keep his spewing DNA off of me.

[Khurkris]

Where was this group when the Clinton*istas were thugging demonstrators a few years ago?

[11th Earl of Mar]

No kidding! My thoughts exactly.

[LetsRok]

I don't like the ACLU nor their tactics, but i feel everybody should have similar access. Freedom of speech is the No. 1 ammendment to the constitution, right?

No. Freddom of "politcal speech" is the No. 1 amendment. Spewing hate of the man is different than disagreeing with his policies.

[freeeee]

This was wrong when Clinton did it.

It just as wrong when Bush does it.

It used to surprise me when I see FReepers defending the same behavior as the Clintons, but hypocrisy has been the norm here for some time.

Behold hypocrites, the only 'free speech zone':

[moodyskeptic]

Good idea. Give the ACLU a call and press this with them. We would love to read their reaction. ;-)

[ex-Texan]

It is high time to investigate, prosecute and convict dozens (if not hundreds) of ACLU lawyers for obvious national security reasons. They are totally out of control.

I know all about how they think and what they do. When I was in law school I worked for a professor who championed ACLU causes on a very high profile school district book burning case. For the first year after I graduated from law school I worked as a volunteer attorney for the ACLU. I grew sickened by what I saw and heard behind closed doors in ACLU meetings. Now I despise them more than any other subversive communist organization.

Today the organization has evolved into a Democratic Party tool defined by the Clintons and supported by their BIG MONEY contributors.

[FreeTheHostages]

You're kidding yourself if you think this is about speech. These anti-Bush people have proven themselves to be violent time and time again.

Look at the Inauguration Day parade -- ACLU sued to let anti-Bush protestors close to the route. Then they were destructive, taking down flags at the Navy memorial and surging toward police lines, and it all got physical.

This is not the same thing as peaceful protests against Clinton.

[ctlpdad]

why not let them get up to the front, then have the teamsters unions drag them around out back & beat the sh!t out of them. Oh, that's right, they only do that to conservatives at Hillary!'s events.

[FreeTheHostages]

no one's saying they can't speak -- they're saying that people with a proven record of violence and an inclination to get physical shouldn't get too close to the president

time, place, and manner

[altura]

Was the ACLU ever worth anything?

Maybe, in the distant reaches of time, they had a noble goal.

Now they are just irritating little mosquitoes taking up worthless irrelavant causes, and taking up the time and energy of people trying to do something.

[FreeTheHostages]

If the constitution says people have to listen to what you want to say, then I'd like time on NBC, CBS and ABC to tell people want a left-wing organization the ACLU has become.

Well put. But alas, as I clearly realize you know, you don't have a First Amendment right to do that -- or to meet with the President and tell him what you think of him.