That's what a lot of bloggers have been doing, according to Letter from Gotham. The issue is this anti-war group, United For Peace and Justice, which wants to hold a peace march. The story being spread around is that they have been denied permission to hold a protest and therefore their First Amendment rights are being trampled on. As you will see if you read the actual complaint, that is not so. I had read about this earlier, and it seemed as if there was something missing from the story. Now I know what it was. Details, baby, details.
(Via Instapundit.)
Posted by Andrea Harris at February 9, 2003 09:14 PMI can already read Corporation Counsel's answer in my head: the First Amendment does not prevent government from imposing reasonable content-neutral time, place and manner restrictions.
Posted by: David Jaroslav at February 10, 2003 at 12:12 AMWhile Bloomberg isn’t literally suppressing free speech and he probably has every legal right to do what he’s doing, not allowing the march seems like a bad idea.
More than anything else, the anti-war movement wants to be oppressed – they want to show the world that they’re being victimized by Bush, his junta, and the vast right wing conspiracy. Bloomberg is just giving them a chance to say “Help! Help! I'm being repressed!”
(I’ve been quoting too many movies lately)
Bloomberg and this ridiculous article in the New York Sun (a newspaper I was thinking of subscribing to) are just giving these groups what they want. They want someone to take their ‘dissent’ seriously.
In fact, their dissent is what it’s always been, pointless and ridiculous. That’s why they should still be allowed to speak up, to run naked in the snow in the middle of central park if they want to. People need to see these activists for what they really are.
Posted by: mary at February 10, 2003 at 11:16 AM