SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: epicure who wrote (30271)2/19/2004 1:19:52 AM
From: D. Long  Read Replies (2) of 793706
 
By fencing off only demonstrators who disagree with the president, and not ALL demonstrators, content has been regulated

Sorry, that is precisely what the Supreme Court has previously ruled is NOT the case.

There is a whole body of rulings on this point. The general rule is the "time, place, and manner" rule which must be content neutral UNLESS it is in a case of compelling state interest. The Court has also ruled in many of the abortion clinic protester cases that limiting the speech of only anti-abortion demonstrators to a "buffer zone" is not a restriction of First Amendment rights because of expectations of prior behavior of such a class in similar circumstances. There was also a case regarding a Wisconsin ordinance against picketing private homes that the Court ruled the state had a compelling interest in limiting such expression because of the "captive" nature of the audience.

Derek
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News