|
|
Giving the First Amendment a Beating at the G-20(Originally posted in Jurist.) Law enforcement officials have, over the past decade, used gatherings of national and international leaders as license to suspend civil liberties. During the recent G-20 Summit, Pittsburgh proved to be no exception. The city was transformed into a police state where our most cherished freedoms, especially the freedom to dissent, were subject to the martial law-type tactics I witnessed behind the Iron Curtain. While world leaders were quietly secluded behind closed doors, 8-foot-high steel and mesh fences lined most downtown streets. Six thousand police and National Guard troops manned checkpoints, roamed the streets in armored humvees, and were visible everywhere in large groups. In this militarized ghost town, neither common folk nor demonstrators ever got close to the dignitaries. Before the Summit, local officials paid lip service to the First Amendment. But just as in Poland under martial law in the early 1980's, where only carefully controlled demonstrations sanctioned by communist-party bosses were allowed, protesters who lacked political ties to the establishment in Pittsburgh last week were threatened, harassed, and outright prohibited from peacefully expressing their opposition to G-20 policies. The gamesmanship began early. Initially resistant to allowing any demonstrations during the Summit, the City eventually relented and permitted several mainstream groups, including former Vice President Al Gore’s climate group, to hold events in a local park. But when two less politically-connected groups, Codepink and Three Rivers Climate Convergence (3RCC), renewed their requests to use the same park, the City refused. The rich and powerful were welcome in Pittsburgh, but those with edgier critical messages were not. A federal judge eventually ordered the City to issue permits to Codepink and 3RCC, ruling that no good reason existed for precluding them. Unfortunately, the mistreatment and harassment of 3RCC and other protesters didn’t end with the judge’s order. Police vehicles blocked 3RCC’s educational and food buses, preventing them from going to the demonstration. City officials permitted the group to leave its tent, artwork, and literature in the park overnight, but would not allow anyone to stand guard- claiming that standing guard would constitute illegal camping. The next day everything was gone. In a moment of surprising candor, the City’s spokeswoman admitted to a local reporter that the Public Works department had confiscated 3RCC’s property. With all necessary props gone, the climate-justice demonstrations never materialized. Despite this intensive scrutiny, which included dozens of warrantless raids on activists’ homes and meeting places and countless pretextual traffic stops, only one person was arrested prior to the Summit – for giving a nickname instead of her birth name. In the eeriest parallel to my experiences in martial law Poland, on two consecutive evenings the police inexplicably deemed assemblies of people peacefully gathered in a large, grassy University of Pittsburgh plaza to be “unlawful” and ordered everyone to disperse immediately. Police used an “LRAD” (first-ever civilian use of a military sonic weapon that can cause permanent hearing loss), shot pepper spray into dormitory stairwells, and fired rubber bullets and beanbags at fleeing students and curiosity seekers. When those assembled tried to follow dispersal orders, many ran into the nearly 1000 riot police that encircled the group. The 100-plus arrestees included many curious, non-participating Pitt students and a few journalists. In this police state, apparently, government-sanctioned assemblies are allowed, but spontaneous demonstrations or gatherings, even peaceful ones, are not. During the Summit, as expected, a few out-of-town kids broke a dozen windows. Police presence at the crime scenes were minimal, primarily because just a few blocks away the massive manpower surge was suppressing the peaceful gathering at the University. If a few of those police officers had simply stood on street corners around the area, even that little damage would have been minimized, Officers who happened to be standing in front of a targeted coffee shop during the two-person rampage discouraged any vandalism. Pittsburgh’s use of harassment, intimidation, trickery, and indiscriminate arrests against demonstrators was fairly typical of the recent handling of other large important gatherings at the hands of various groups of law enforcement officials. At times when the imperative to allow freedom of speech and assembly is greatest – when national and international leaders convene – we impose martial law. Surely a more balanced model that provides security and respects civil liberties is possible.
We intend the comments portion of this blog to be a forum where you can freely express your views on blog postings and on comments made by other people. Given that, please understand that you are responsible for the material you post on the comments portion of this blog. The only postings that we ask that you refrain from posting and that we cannot permit on our website are requests for legal assistance and postings that could cause ACLU to incur legal liability.
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites. We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published. Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section. 6 Responses to "Giving the First Amendment a Beating at the G-20" |
|
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
Oct 6th, 2009 at 12:36pm
Not buying your explanation. There are better things to worry about. They went there looking for trouble and got it. I did not see any of this when the Mobs (liberal term) of Tea Party protesters marched. Free Speach does not belong with this story. This is like someone yelling fire in a movie theater. I don't believe that is allowed under free speach!
Oct 6th, 2009 at 2:23pm
The youtube videos I saw shows a bit more mayhem than "a few out-of-town kids broke a dozen windows". I don't support cracking down on free speech, it behooves the ACLU to avoid turning rioters into angels when they aren't.
Oct 7th, 2009 at 10:33am
"Today we need a nation of minute men; citizens who are not only prepared to take up arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as a basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom. The cause of liberty, the cause of American, cannot succeed with any lesser effort."
-- President John F. Kennedy, January 29, 1961
Nov 19th, 2009 at 11:20am
Maggie, FYI, you not only have a right to yell, "Fire!", in a theatre, you have a civic duty to do so --- if there is a fire. That SCOTUS justice said only that the 1st Amendment did not protect a right to yell "Fire!" FALSELY in a crowded theatre.
Nov 20th, 2009 at 12:16am
since when is this new behavior by
any government in america. it ALWAYS
happened like this! its government
for the wealthy by the connected.
everyone else sorry but we have to
knock you in the head with a night
stick or maybe shoot you! in truth
other then certain situations where
its a religious thing or such where
groups like the aclu sue there
really much free speech in the us
and the government is always looking
at more ways to limit what we now
have!
Nov 25th, 2009 at 7:00pm
its sad but true the government is here to squelch any attempt to dispute its methods and interests. A government of rich and corrupt will not survive though. We the low and down trodden will ultimately sit down and refuse to do their will. Either that or die! It is time to peacefully and forcefully resist the evil beast!