Homework September 6th

Federal Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of

2011
President Obama signed H.R 347: Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds
Improvement Act of 2011. This law allows the Secret Service more
jurisdiction to make arrests and move protests during an intentional
disruption of government functions. The law defines restricted buildings and
grounds as the White House, the Vice Presidents official residence, buildings
or grounds where the President or someone protected by the Secret Service
is at, or a building or grounds restricted because of an event of national
significance. The law also gave more power to Secret Service, for they could
arrest someone who who knew they were in a restriced area but not that
they knew they were committing a crime. This is a revision from previous
laws that required a person to knowingly and willingly act to commit a
trespassing crime. There is much controversy surrounding this Act because it
regulates the location of the speech and who can hear it, which are
fundamental necessities of assembly.

Court Cases
Whitney v. California
Anita Whitney was convicted in 1919 under Californias Syndicalism Act for
promoting the Communist Labor Party, even though she herself never
advocated for violence. The question to the Court was if this act violated the
First and Fourteenth Amendments. The court upheld the conviction in an
unanimous decision, stating they may restrict the first amendment if the
speech and organization threatened to endanger the government. The
concurring opinion by Justice Brandeis, who argued that only clear and
present danger should warrant a suppression of rights, and that the freedom
of speech and assembly are distinct fundamental rights.

Snyder v. Phelps
The family of a dead marine sues Westboro Baptist Church when they
displayed inflammatory signs against homosexuality in the army at the
funeral. The question to the Supreme Court was does the First Amendment
protect protesters at a funeral from liability when they intentionally inflict
emotional distress on the family of the deceased. The Court ruled that the
protesters were protected, because they were speaking on matters of public
concern, and debate on issues of public land (across from the funeral).
should be uninhibited.

Limits on Freedom of Assembly

Present

Time, Place and Manner restrictions (Public Forum doctrine) (Funeral

Protests)
Permits for Assembling
Free Speech Zones (HR 347)
o Substantial government interest
o Content neutral
o Cant restrict 1st amendment more than it is restricting
compelling interest
Clear and present danger standards
Demonstration zones
Limits near government officials
Compelling national security interests
Cant do it on private property

More

Bright line approach in the Russo Law article, that the government can
only restrict assembly if there is an alternative, suitable place to
assemble