Skip to main content

View Diary: Man Wearing 'Occupy Everything' Jacket Arrested At First Amendment-Free Zone In SCOTUS Building (222 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  He could have worn that shirt right outside (7+ / 0-)

    the building on the sidewalk to "inform the public."  

    Groups have very high profile demonstrations outside of the Supreme Court building all the time.  

    •  I'm very well aware. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dallasdoc, markthshark, wader

      Having been arrested with Cornel West and 18 others on the steps in Oct. '11 protesting the plutocracy and those who support it.

      Moderates will decide as much as anyone how this goes. There will be disruption. The Climate and the climate will bring that about. Moderates will be the swing vote.

      When 1% take 121% of the gains from "recovery", people actually recovering from lost employment are trading down on wages and benefits. Current strategies by moderates don't even consider winning the Class War.

      by Words In Action on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 07:49:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  This is what I don't get... (0+ / 0-)
      He could have worn that shirt right outside (2+ / 0-)

      the building on the sidewalk to "inform the public."

      How could any determination of intent be made that Scott wanted to "inform the public," when (1) he was quiet and subdued while he was in the SCOTUS lobby. And (2) it was two lousy words on a jacket that he may have just felt like expressing at the time.

      Where's the intent to inform anyone?

      This is not the movie "Minority Report." We don't have "thought" police in this country... not yet anyway.

      "That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history." ~ Aldous Huxley

      by markthshark on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 08:22:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Why did he refuse repeatedly to cover it up (3+ / 0-)

        or leave, then?  

        At any rate, the SCOTUS police don't interpret the subjective intent of the wearer.  If someone SEEING it would interpret it as a message in support of a movement, they ask you to cover it up or leave.

        And in January 2012, most people who saw a t-shirt with "Occupy Everything" would have considered those words to be a support of the Occupy Movement.  Just as "Thou shalt not kill" (the sign I've seen in from of the houses of people in the anti-abortion movement) would be treated the same.  Or a t-shirt saying "God hates ___s" that the Westboro group uses.

        Even a shirt saying "I support First Amendment rights" would be treated the same.  It doesn't matter what the message or the movement is.  

      •  He acknowledges that he was making (5+ / 0-)

        a statement.  That's the first amendment component of his argument: "I was making a statement, and I have a first amendment right to do so."

        So your "concern" has been asked and answered by the plaintiff.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (180)
  • Community (80)
  • Baltimore (76)
  • Bernie Sanders (57)
  • Civil Rights (44)
  • Freddie Gray (43)
  • Elections (35)
  • Hillary Clinton (32)
  • Culture (30)
  • Law (27)
  • Labor (26)
  • Racism (26)
  • 2016 (24)
  • Economy (23)
  • Media (23)
  • Education (23)
  • Politics (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Texas (20)
  • Barack Obama (19)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site