Posts
Washington, D.C. -- Pro-life students, members of Students for Life of America (SLFA) who had been arrested in August for legally writing in chalk: "Black Preborn Lives Matter" are now suing the city for the infringement of their First Amendment rights.
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed a lawsuit this week on behalf of these students.
While an entire plaza is named and permanently painted with “Black Lives Matter” (BLM), the pro-life students were barred from writing “Black Preborn Lives Matter” in chalk outside of a Planned Parenthood building, despite the fact that they’d received a permit to do so from the city.
Yes, they had a freaking permit!
The students’ chalk message,“Black Preborn Lives Matter,” served to address the fact that unborn children of minority mothers have a statistically higher likelihood of being aborted, according to this Supreme Court amicus curiae brief.
According to SFLA, the group had obtained a permit from the city to peacefully protest with the use of temporary paint on sidewalks, but the D.C. Metro police said otherwise. They warned them they’d be arrested for the use of temporary paint, despite the fact that pro-BLM protesters had been allowed to use paint for their “Defund The Police” message.
So, in an attempt to comply with the self-loathing cops, the pro-life activists instead used chalk, as it was far easier to remove. A light rainfall would do the job, but the police still wouldn’t allow it because they didn't want to offend the Marxist BLMers.
“Two students were arrested trying to express in chalk what they were not allowed to say in paint,” said Students for Life of America President Kristan Hawkins. “That kind of viewpoint discrimination cannot be allowed to continue unchallenged.”
In a letter sent to the execrable Mayor Muriel Bowser before the incident, Hawkins noted:
Your original decision to paint ‘Black Lives Matter’ on the street is government speech. However, your decision to allow protestors to paint ‘Defund the Police’ opened the streets up as a public forum. You are not permitted to discriminate on the basis of viewpoint in making determinations relating to public assemblies in public fora.
Viewpoint discrimination is the unconstitutional practice of a government prohibiting certain speech and expression on the basis of the message it promulgates.
The students’ chalk message,“Black Preborn Lives Matter,” served to address the fact that unborn children of minority mothers have a statistically higher likelihood of being aborted, according to this Supreme Court amicus curiae brief.
According to SFLA, the group had obtained a permit from the city to peacefully protest with the use of temporary paint on sidewalks, but the D.C. Metro police said otherwise. They warned them they’d be arrested for the use of temporary paint, despite the fact that pro-BLM protesters had been allowed to use paint for their “Defund The Police” message.
So, in an attempt to comply with the self-loathing cops, the pro-life activists instead used chalk, as it was far easier to remove. A light rainfall would do the job, but the police still wouldn’t allow it because they didn't want to offend the Marxist BLMers.
“Two students were arrested trying to express in chalk what they were not allowed to say in paint,” said Students for Life of America President Kristan Hawkins. “That kind of viewpoint discrimination cannot be allowed to continue unchallenged.”
In a letter sent to the execrable Mayor Muriel Bowser before the incident, Hawkins noted:
Your original decision to paint ‘Black Lives Matter’ on the street is government speech. However, your decision to allow protestors to paint ‘Defund the Police’ opened the streets up as a public forum. You are not permitted to discriminate on the basis of viewpoint in making determinations relating to public assemblies in public fora.
Viewpoint discrimination is the unconstitutional practice of a government prohibiting certain speech and expression on the basis of the message it promulgates.
And let's hope they take the city to the cleaners.
The U.S. Supreme Court has on multiple occasions ruled on such discrimination cases that violate the First Amendment.
In the opinion of the Court Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley (1972), Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote “the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content.”
Twenty-three years later, the unconstitutionality of viewpoint discrimination was solidified in Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia (1995).
Justice Anthony Kennedy delivered the opinion of the court, stating, “When the government targets not subject matter but particular views taken by speakers on a subject, the violation of the First Amendment is all the more blatant.”
Justice Kennedy further noted viewpoint discrimination as an “egregious form of content discrimination.”
In the opinion of the Court Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley (1972), Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote “the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content.”
Twenty-three years later, the unconstitutionality of viewpoint discrimination was solidified in Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia (1995).
Justice Anthony Kennedy delivered the opinion of the court, stating, “When the government targets not subject matter but particular views taken by speakers on a subject, the violation of the First Amendment is all the more blatant.”
Justice Kennedy further noted viewpoint discrimination as an “egregious form of content discrimination.”
This is what the left has been calling for regarding conservative viewpoints as they would like to eliminate all differing political thought.
“Because of the city’s actions, Frederick Douglass Foundation and Students for Life of America weren’t able to participate in the public square as other groups have,” said Legal Counsel Elissa Graves of ADF, the group heading up the lawsuit. “The government can’t discriminate against certain viewpoints by allowing some voices to be heard while silencing others.”
“Because of the city’s actions, Frederick Douglass Foundation and Students for Life of America weren’t able to participate in the public square as other groups have,” said Legal Counsel Elissa Graves of ADF, the group heading up the lawsuit. “The government can’t discriminate against certain viewpoints by allowing some voices to be heard while silencing others.”
But they will continue to try discriminating against these viewpoints because their arguments against them are weak.
C'mon, man, gimme a break. You know you want to follow Brain Flushings--it's free and worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a liberal sheds a tear. C'mon.
Tweet
C'mon, man, gimme a break. You know you want to follow Brain Flushings--it's free and worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a liberal sheds a tear. C'mon.
No comments:
Post a Comment