Free speech zone

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The free speech zone at the 2004 Democratic National Convention

Free speech zones (also known as First Amendment Zones, Free speech cages, and Protest zones) are areas set aside in public places for political activists to exercise their right of free speech in the United States. They are based on U.S. court decisions stipulating that the government may regulate the time and place -- but not content -- of expression. Some critics have suggested that authorities use such zones in a heavy-handed manner to suppress the expression of specific content. Other critics suggest that, whether or not these abuses have actually taken place, the creation of such zones leave the door open to this kind of abuse.

1 History
2 Legality
3 Criticisms
4 In Fiction
5 References
6 External links

[edit] History

During the 1988 Democratic National Convention, the city of Atlanta set up an official "free speech area"^[1] so the convention would not be disrupted. A pro-choice demonstrator against an Operation Rescue group said Atlanta Mayor Andrew Young "put us in a free-speech cage."^[2]

WTO Ministerial Conference of 1999 protest activity saw a number of changes to how law enforcement deals with protest activities. "The [National Lawyer's] Guild, which has a 35-year history of monitoring First Amendment activity, has witnessed a notable change in police treatment of political protesters since the November 1999 World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle. At subsequent gatherings in Washington, D.C., Detroit, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Miami, Chicago, Portland, and Detroit, a pattern of behavior that stifles First Amendment rights has emerged" ^[3]

Free speech zones were used in Boston at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, after a bid to keep protesters out of downtown Boston was abandoned due to harsh media criticism of its dictatorial implications. The free speech zones organized by the authorities in Boston were boxed in by concrete walls, invisible to the Fleet center where the convention was held and criticized harshly as a 'protest pen' or 'Bostons camp X-Ray'.^[4]

Free speech zones were used again in New York at the 2004 Republican National Convention, after a bid to keep protesters out of the whole city was abandoned due to harsh media criticism of its dictatorial implications.

Prominent examples of recent free speech zones are those set up by the Secret Service, who scout locations where the president is scheduled to speak, or pass through. Officials will target those who carry anti-Bush signs and escort them to the free speech zones prior to and during the event. Reporters are often barred by local officials from displaying these protesters on camera or speaking to them within the zone. ^[5]^[6]Protesters who refuse to go to the free speech zone are often arrested and charged with trespassing, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.^[7]^[8] A seldom-used federal law making it unlawful to "willfully and knowingly to enter or remain in ... any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting" has also been invoked.^[9]^[10]

[edit] Legality

The Supreme Court has ruled that picketing and marching in public areas has some degree of protection under the First Amendment, but less than that afforded to pure speech due to the physical externalities it creates. Regulations for such activities, however, may not target the content of the expression. However, the secret service routinely targets only protesters. ^[11]

"These [Free Speech] zones routinely succeed in keeping protesters out of presidential sight and outside the view of media covering the event. When Bush came to the Pittsburgh area on Labor Day 2002, 65-year-old retired steel worker Bill Neel was there to greet him with a sign proclaiming, 'The Bush family must surely love the poor, they made so many of us.' The local police, at the Secret Service's behest, set up a 'designated free-speech zone' on a baseball field surrounded by a chain-link fence a third of a mile from the location of Bush's speech. The police cleared the path of the motorcade of all critical signs, though folks with pro-Bush signs were permitted to line the president's path... Police detective John Ianachione testified that the Secret Service told local police to confine 'people that were there making a statement pretty much against the president and his views'"^[8] The judge in that case threw out the charges, stating that "I believe this is America. Whatever happened to 'I don't agree with you, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it'?"^[5]

At another incident in South Carolina, Brett Bursey was singled out as the one person in a crowd of thousands with a sign protesting George Bush's arrival. When he refused an order to go to the free speech zone half-a-mile away, he was arrested and charged with trespassing by the South Carolina police. "Bursey said that he asked the policeman if 'it was the content of my sign, and he said, 'Yes, sir, it's the content of your sign that's the problem.'" However, those trespassing charges were dropped. Instead, Bursey was indicted by the federal government for violation of a federal law that allows the Secret Service to restrict access to areas visited by the president. Bursey faced up to six months in prison and a US$5,000 fine. ^[8] However, after a trial, Bursey was convicted of the offense of trespassing, but the judge deemed the offense to be relatively minor and ordered a fine of $500 be assessed, which Bursey appealed, and lost. ^[12]

[edit] Criticisms

A "First Amendment Area" at the Muir Woods National Monument.

Civil libertarians claim that Free Speech Zones are used as a form of censorship and public relations management to conceal the existence of popular opposition from the mass public and elected officials.^[13] There is much controversy surrounding the creation of these areas — the mere existence of such zones is offensive to some people, who maintain that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution makes the entire country an unrestricted free speech zone. ^[13] The Department of Homeland Security "has even gone so far as to tell local police departments to regard critics of the War on Terrorism as potential terrorists themselves."^[7] ^[14]

The Bush administration has been criticized by columnist James Bovard of The American Conservative for requiring protesters to stay within a designated area, while allowing supporters access to more areas.^[8] According to the Chicago Tribune, the American Civil Liberties Union has asked a federal court in Washington D.C. to prevent the Secret Service from keeping anti-Bush protesters distant from presidential appearances while allowing supporters to display their messages up close, where they are likely to be seen by the news media.^[8] Regarding free speech zones, U. S. District Court Judge Douglas Woodlock has commented that "One cannot conceive of what other design elements could be put into a space to create a more symbolic affront to the role of free expression."^[15]

The preliminary plan for the 2004 Democratic National Convention was criticized by the National Lawyers Guild and the ACLU of Massachusetts as being insufficient to handle the size of the expected protest. According to the Boston Globe, "The zone would hold as few as 400 of the several thousand protesters who are expected in Boston in late July."^[16]

[edit] In Fiction

Free speech zones were at issue in a fictional court case on the television show The Practice. Free speech zones were parodied in the Arrested Development episode Whistler's Mother.^[17]