there is a federal law that restricts protesting in areas protected by the Secret Service? And, if arrested and found guilty of violating this law, a conviction could lead to a year in prison?
Live and learn, huh?
=========================
"On Monday, the removal of approximately two dozen black college students from a crowd waiting for Donald Trump at Valdosta State University in Georgia raised some eyebrows, with people questioning why students were stripped of their right to free speech at an event held on their college campus. What they may not realize is that they are paying the price for their lack of activism in the past and not because they were black, as suggested in an article by Robert Mackey. The reason they were actually removed was because of a federal law that restricts protesting in areas protected by the Secret Service.
After complaints were submitted to campus administrators regarding free speech suppression on campus, Cecil P. Stanton, the interim president VSU, argued that the school was rendered powerless to prevent the incident in a letter of response. Why? Because of an amendment to a federal law that happened long before Trump rose on the political scene.
“While this is disturbing, it should be remembered that this was not a VSU-sponsored event, but a private function,” Mr. Stanton wrote. “The Trump campaign, together with the Secret Service and other law-enforcement officials, had responsibility for such decisions, not VSU.”
Stanton was citing the federal law (H.R. 347) which prohibits protesting of any type in an area under protection by the Secret Service.
The bill, formally titled “The Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act”, passed by a landslide 399-3 in the House and was meant to give the impression that it would improve the aesthetics of private property by restricting unwanted crowds, such as those pesky and unsightly “Occupy Wall Street” protesters.
Take note, political activists: this is a prime example of how a law that may work to benefit you today may also work against you tomorrow, particularly when basic individual liberty is concerned.
Journalist Dahlia Lithwick and First Amendment lawyer Raymond Vasvari observed this phenomenon in 2012, when federal law regarding trespassing was quietly amended. According to the article,
Old law made it a federal offense to ‘willfully and knowingly’ enter a restricted space, now prosecutors need only show that you did it “knowingly” — that you knew the area was restricted, even if you didn’t know it was illegal to enter the space
The revised statute made it feasible for the government, with the help of the electorate, to criminalize a protest, an offense now punishable by up to one year in prison.
What does this mean? It means that, yes, Donald Trump can legally throw you out of a private rally, even if you are standing in solidarity and not creating a scene. The statute also limits protesting for anyone else who is granted Secret Service protection, such as Hillary Clinton, a privilege granted to her for life as a former first lady.
While protesters complain about being denied their free speech at a private Trump rally, it is fair to assume by the overwhelming voting results that those same people weren’t kicking up a fuss about it on March 8, 2012, when President Barack Obama signed this amendment into law."
Live and learn, huh?
=========================
"On Monday, the removal of approximately two dozen black college students from a crowd waiting for Donald Trump at Valdosta State University in Georgia raised some eyebrows, with people questioning why students were stripped of their right to free speech at an event held on their college campus. What they may not realize is that they are paying the price for their lack of activism in the past and not because they were black, as suggested in an article by Robert Mackey. The reason they were actually removed was because of a federal law that restricts protesting in areas protected by the Secret Service.
After complaints were submitted to campus administrators regarding free speech suppression on campus, Cecil P. Stanton, the interim president VSU, argued that the school was rendered powerless to prevent the incident in a letter of response. Why? Because of an amendment to a federal law that happened long before Trump rose on the political scene.
“While this is disturbing, it should be remembered that this was not a VSU-sponsored event, but a private function,” Mr. Stanton wrote. “The Trump campaign, together with the Secret Service and other law-enforcement officials, had responsibility for such decisions, not VSU.”
Stanton was citing the federal law (H.R. 347) which prohibits protesting of any type in an area under protection by the Secret Service.
The bill, formally titled “The Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act”, passed by a landslide 399-3 in the House and was meant to give the impression that it would improve the aesthetics of private property by restricting unwanted crowds, such as those pesky and unsightly “Occupy Wall Street” protesters.
Take note, political activists: this is a prime example of how a law that may work to benefit you today may also work against you tomorrow, particularly when basic individual liberty is concerned.
Journalist Dahlia Lithwick and First Amendment lawyer Raymond Vasvari observed this phenomenon in 2012, when federal law regarding trespassing was quietly amended. According to the article,
Old law made it a federal offense to ‘willfully and knowingly’ enter a restricted space, now prosecutors need only show that you did it “knowingly” — that you knew the area was restricted, even if you didn’t know it was illegal to enter the space
The revised statute made it feasible for the government, with the help of the electorate, to criminalize a protest, an offense now punishable by up to one year in prison.
What does this mean? It means that, yes, Donald Trump can legally throw you out of a private rally, even if you are standing in solidarity and not creating a scene. The statute also limits protesting for anyone else who is granted Secret Service protection, such as Hillary Clinton, a privilege granted to her for life as a former first lady.
While protesters complain about being denied their free speech at a private Trump rally, it is fair to assume by the overwhelming voting results that those same people weren’t kicking up a fuss about it on March 8, 2012, when President Barack Obama signed this amendment into law."
