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]

Hmm. Actually, their lawsuit is perfectly legal. It's not unlawful to file suit -- the courthouse doors are always open, as they say.

[FreeTheHostages]

ROFL!

Yup, there's people working hard to get Hinckley out.

Some people have TOO MUCH TIME!

[Admin Moderator]

Knock it off

[sweetliberty]

Not suggesting that it was illegal; just that they have been shoving their godless and unamerican agenda down our throats for too long. We need to fight back. Use their own game against them.

[Donna Lee Nardo]

Yes, most folks don't listen to profanity on this forum; they READ references to it that are not always spelled out completely. P.S. Hey, even Jesus called some folks the relatives of satan when he was calling spades spades; I do not like to even think about or write "satan," so I prefer incompletely spelled expletives when I am as incensed as Jesus was when he so rightly overturned the tables... :)

[sweetliberty]

"Now they are just irritating little mosquitoes taking up worthless irrelavant causes"

Now they are just irritating deadly, disease carrying little mosquitoes taking up worthless irrelavant causes every cause they can find against American interests. It's not about free speech. It's about control.

[DaGman]

Don't some people notice that there is no difference between Freeping Clinton or Hillary and protesting Bush? To me, this is a clear case of "be careful what you ask for" if you want the ACLU to lose. If the ACLU loses, everyone, regardless of the protesters will be required to be in some "free speech zone".

[auggy]

"Now to be fair the ACLU didn't care when Clinton did it, and now they seem to care. So we know the ACLU is a bunch of hypocrites, just like a bunch of FReepers. "

"Now to be fair"! Don't mess up a perfect record by being fair.

[Donna Lee Nardo]

That's the aclu: they have an agenda and it does not include fighting to uphold traditional values and morals. Anything to the contrary, however, is good ground for the aclu's efforts it appears.

[tgslTakoma]

Oh Hellsbells, Free... why do they fiddlefart around with filing a lawsuit on behalf of NOW, UfPJ, ACORN and USAction? Poor ol' Al Qaida and their great buddies from cANSWER can't get near enough to the president, either.

Is ACLU on the terror watch list yet?

[Wondervixen]

Piss on the Athiest Communist Litigation Union.

I recall 1992, when a certain couple from Arkansas running for "co-president" came through Marietta, Ohio and had their thugs hold opposing voices and sign carriers out of sight. Only those people who were willing to hold PRO-Clinton signs were allowed in, and THEY were watched closely by the thugs.

[Wondervixen]

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

Mostly from benefactors like Edward Asner.

[Milligan]

People did throw eggs at the motorcade during the Inauguration. Do you liked to get egged? Or do you egg people in parades. I know you! You egged our marching band!
Do you know how much it cost to clean our uniforms?

[Wondervixen]

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

No they didn't.

The ACLU was founded in 1920 by American Communists with the expressed intent to throw a monkey wrench into our judicial system, assisting with the Communist goal of world takeover.

Everywhere else, Communism has died off deader than a Tyranosaurus. Here, it seems to be as alive and well as ever.

[findingtruth]

nope, not a bubble against speech a bubble against people who espouse and advocate violence in tht context very appropriate

Darned right! Anyone who protests against our leader is obviously violent-prone and needs to be declared an enemy combatant and locked up permanent without a trial!

[Imal]

The ACLU complaint lists several incidents where protesters were forced to assemble blocks away from where the president or vice president was speaking, while supporters of the administration's policy could hold their signs up in front of the building.

I am having a hard time trying to understand how some FReepers could support something as blatantly wrong as this. Particularly when FReepers have been victims of this exact same tactic under the Clintons and various other left-wing tyrants.

Is it because the ACLU opposes it? I hope we're better grounded as Americans than that. Opposition for opposition's sake is what leftists like the Democrats do. Conservatism means standing for what is known to be right, not reflexive reaction to what is thought to be wrong.

Is it because dissenters pose a greater security risk? True danger to the president's security does not come from overt dissent, but from covert operators, who may strike from any cover. Hint: a potential assassin would do well not to be carrying a sign that says "Death to Bush".

This sword cuts both ways. Denying dissenters the same rights of speech and peaceable assembly as supporters is indeed not only unconstitutional, but morally reprehensible. It is also unAmerican. Protesters should not have to sue the government to achieve parity of civil rights simply because they have a differing political viewpoint.

Disgraceful.

[visualops]

I deplore hypocrites.
Those of us who are vocal in condemning the Liberals/Democrats for dishonesty had darn well better practice what we preach.

[Milligan]

Agree with post 16.
Vandalism is not free speech.

Secret Service sole job is to protect the President. They want to avoid any high risk situations. Security is up to the Secret Service not the ACLU.

[FreeTheHostages]

"obviously violent-prone"

You obviously haven't seen the ANSWER crowd. Well, I live in DC and I see them all the time.

Yes, in fact, they're rather upfront about the violence part.

Facts. Always useful in these discussions.

[John Robertson]

Donations from libs. They give big-time to the ACLU, which is the only church many of them have.