You've all likely read about this, and/or seen the video below (my student, Mike Plugh, first brought this to my attention):
A 60-year old librarian in Denver was carrying a sign with the message, McCain=Bush, as she waited to attend a McCain town hall meeting at the Denver Center for the Performing Arts (a public venue). Some guy in a beige jacket asks her to remove the sign. She refuses. An onlooker asks him why she's been asked to remove the sign. The beige jacket responds that he was "asked" to do this, "by representatives of the Secret Service." Soon after, a Denver policeman starts talking, and informs the librarian that she has two choices: keep the sign, and be issued a ticket for "trespass," or get rid of the sign, in which case she can continue to stand in line to attend the McCain town hall event. Carol Kreck, the brave librarian, takes the ticket. She's escorted off the public premises, and tells the camera that she's been told that, if she returns, she'll be arrested.
This is one of the most outrageous violations of the First Amendment I've seen in a long time. Not a case of allegedly indecent broadcasting, in which there is at least a confused (and unconstitutional) Federal Communications Act to back it up. Not a shield law issue, which, although profound in its threat to the First Amendment, is not a direct assault upon it.
No, this is about as straight-up an attack on the First Amendment as you can get - an attack on exactly what Jefferson and our Founding Fathers were protecting in the very First Amendment to our Constitution: the right of every citizen to express her or his political views, unobstructed by the government.
What's to be done?
1. The Secret Service owes America an explanation. If they indeed put the beige jacket and the Denver police up to harassing and preventing Ms. Kreck from exercising her First Amendment rights, then those in the Secret Service who did this should be fired and brought up on criminal charges.
2. If the beige jacket was lying, and was not told to do this by the Secret Service, then he should be brought up on harassment and other criminal charges.
3. The Denver police in either case were pathetic. If the Secret Service ordered them to harass Ms. Kreck, they should have refused to follow the order, and should be reprimanded for such ignorance of the First Amendment. If the Secret Service gave no such order, and they harassed Ms. Kreck on the basis of what the beige suit told them, then they should be fired.
It's time we started standing up for our rights.
11 comments:
Thanks for giving this attention. It needs to be seen for three reasons:
1. 1st Amendment issues should be vigorously defended.
2. It highlights the atmosphere inherent in modern Republican circles and the general attitude about dissent, democracy, and the 1st Amendment.
3. It demonstrates the democratic power of new media to influence our environment. YouTube and social media combine to form a democratic mass media capable of giving "air" to issues like this, largely ignored in the simplified narrative preferred by traditional media.
Free Carol Kreck!!
Aren't McCain town halls essentially private events? Can't people who hold private events exclude whoever they want, even if it's at a public venue?
I'm not sure about the First Amendment right at issue here. If you have any case law backing up your arguments, feel free to cite it.
Of course, most of the people who express outrage about this stuff are Obama partisans, so I take it with a huge grain of salt.
Thanks for the comment, Barry.
1. McCain's event was billed as open to the public - that's why Ms. Kreck was waiting on line. And she was escorted off of the sidewalk - a public place in any case.
2. Here's an extensive summary of case law on the First Amendment and carrying signs, at events (since you apparently haven't heard of Google, and/or haven't the energy to do a 5-second search yourself). The vast majority of Supreme Court decisions support the First Amendment in these matters, with a few benighted decisions as well (but what can you expect from a Supreme Court that gave us Plessy v. Ferguson, etc).
3. So you are unacquainted with libertarians and conservative Republicans with a fierce devotion to the Constitution? Last time I checked, they were not supporting Obama, but were fervent on the First Amendment.
Forgot to say this to Mike (first comment) - thanks for being the first to bring this to my attention, with your Facebook post.
I think this was a public venue- and thats what bugs me. if this was a truly open to the public forum, they had no right telling that lady to move.
this is exactly like what the BATFE did to Calvary Arms. check my blogpost about that debacle as well. the older I get the more I dislike large government.
Yes he does, and Obama owes america an explanation for his violation of the 4th amendment with his FISA vote.
anon: Obama didn't violate the 4th Amendment with his vote.
Bush and the telecom cos did when they conducted wiretaps without warrants.
The FISA amendment that Obama voted for, and which passed, allows for criminal prosecution of the Bush administration and the telecoms.
Thanks Dr. Levinson.
Do I get another personalize tag to up my tally at InfiniteRegress. I'm collecting. ;)
:) You got it!
I also added you to the body of the text - which I should have done in the first place.
I always reward people who speak up for themselves :)
This afternoon, I decided to ride my bicycle down to the White House and express my feelings about Bush, specifically chanting "worst president ever", "war criminal", and that "Bush has committed crimes against humanity".
Very quickly, 2 uniformed Secret Service agents stopped me and asked if I was protesting. I told them that I was. I expected that they would respect my first amendment rights and leave me alone. After all, I was not a threat on my bicycle and wearing traditional spandex cycling clothing. I was informed that the agents were ordered over the radio to "take a report", and they got out a pad and asked for my name and more specifics about my protest. I told them that the Constitituion guaranteed me the right to speak out, without harrasment from the government. I asked that a supervisor be brought in so that these agents could be told about my Constitutional rights. I then told them that I would not give my name becuase I did not want to appear in a report on DICK Cheney's desk. They backed off asking for my name, but demanded to know "how long are you going to protest". I told them I was going to protest until I was finished. I felt that the agents were attempting to get a rise out of me so that they would have something to charge me with, but I did not allow that to happen.
Within 5 minutes, 2 more Uniformed Secret Service agents started in with the same line of questioning. They told me that they received radio instructions to take a report on my activities, which again, I politely refused. These officers were far more professional than the first 2 and our exchange ended quickly.
I really don't understand where in the Secret Service mandate that they have the authority to try and intimidate citizens who are expressing their Constitutional rights. It appears that the Secret Service agents were ordered by their superiors to harass me until I stopped commenting on the fact that George Bush is indeed the Worst President Ever.
Post a Comment