There is an interesting en banc ruling out of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit where the court held that Christian evangelists who were “preaching hate and denigration to a crowd of Muslims” are entitled to damages for being ejected from participation as protesters in the 2012 Arab International Festival. The case raises the long-standing concern over the “heckler’s veto” where a speaker is silenced to appease an angry mob or crowd. The case is Bible Believers v. Wayne County, 2015 FED App. 0258P (6th Cir. 2015)
In his famous law review article coining this term, Harry Kalven observed “If the police can silence the speaker, the law in effect acknowledges a veto power in hecklers who can, by being hostile enough, get the law to silence any speaker of whom they do not approve.” See Harry Kalven, Jr., The Negro and the First Amendment 140 (Ohio St. Univ. Press 1965).
The Sixth Circuit clearly agreed. The Court detailed how in a prior year, the Christians were forced to end their protests. In anticipation of similar efforts by Deputy Chief Mike Jaafar and others involved in the earlier crackdown, the Bible Believers wrote to reconfirm that they would not be targeted to appease the crowd. They received a letter largely denying their account of the prior protests and reminding them that the police would act to stop any potential violence.
In the 2012 protests, the Christians would again be surrounded by irate Muslims and the police would again remove the Christians to avoid any violence. Muslims were incensed by one Christian carrying a severed pig’s head on a spike in a belief it would keep the Muslims at bay. Another declared that “You believe in a prophet who is a pervert,” and, “God will reject you.” Muslims counter-protesters started to take violent action like throwing objects at the Bible Believers.
In summary, the Bible Believers attended the 2012 Festival for the purpose of exercising their First Amendment rights by spreading their anti-Islam religious message. When a crowd of youthful hecklers gathered around the Bible Believers, the police did nothing. When the hecklers began throwing bottles and other garbage at the Bible Believers, a WCSO officer intervened only to demand that the Bible Believers stop utilizing their megaphone to amplify their speech. Virtually absent from the video in the record is any indication that the police attempted to quell the violence being directed toward the Bible Believers by the lawless crowd of adolescents. Despite this apparent lack of effort to maintain any semblance of order at the Festival, each time the police appeared on the video—to reprimand the use of the Bible Believers’ megaphone, to suggest that the Bible Believers had the “option to leave” the Festival, to trot by on horseback while doing next to nothing, and to expel the Bible Believers from the Festival under threat of arrest—the agitated crowd became subdued and orderly simply due the authoritative presence cast by the police officers who were then in close proximity. Only once is an officer seen removing one of the bottle-throwing teens. Israel, when faced with the prospect of being arrested for disorderly conduct, observed, “and you would think we would be complaining, but we’re not.” (R. 28-A, Raw Festival Footage, Time: 00:55:16). The Bible Believers were thereafter escorted from the Festival and ticketed by a large group of WCSO officers for removing the license plate from their van.
It is clear that the police were targeting the speakers rather than those who were threatening to take violent actions or actually taking such actions in response to their exercise of free speech. The Bible Believers were being blamed for “inciting” others — a dangerous standard that would gut the first amendment. Indeed, we have seen the erosion of free speech in the West based on such notions of incitement This includes some efforts in the United States by groups to ban free speech in subway advertisements and other forums.
The Sixth Circuit refused to join this trend:
Notably, a heckler’s veto effectuated by the police will nearly always be susceptible to being reimagined and repackaged [*63] as a means for protecting the public, or the speaker himself, from actual or impending harm. After all, if the audience is sufficiently incensed by the speaker’s message and responds aggressively or even violently thereto, one method of quelling that response would be to cut off the speech and eject the speaker whose words provoked the crowd’s ire. Our point here is that before removing the speaker due to safety concerns, and thereby permanently cutting off his speech, the police must first make bona fide efforts to protect the speaker from the crowd’s hostility by other, less restrictive means.
For me, the role of Corporation Counsel in this flagrantly unconstitutional action is the most disturbing. The Sixth Circuit noted “Corporation Counsel informed the Bible Believers by way of letter that ‘under state law and local ordinances, individuals can be held criminally accountable for conduct which has the tendency to incite riotous behavior or otherwise disturb the peace.'” That position is not only in direct conflict with core constitutional cases and principles, it would negate much of our free speech values in the United States. Fortunately, the Sixth Circuit has not lost sight of those values but it is a dangerous thing to have key police and lawyers in Wayne County who maintain such ill-informed and abusive views.
Nash
More on elections and stuff,
Wanna bet I can find 1,000,000 Republicans who still think Obama is illegitimate? Wanna bet I can find 1,000,000 Republicans who think Obama is a Muslim?
You’ve got 15-20 people running for president. Wanna make a bet I can’t get 5 to stand in front of a national debate audience and say “Obama is not a Muslim”.
Wanna make a bet that I can’t get Christy to say Social Security isn’t broke and the government didn’t steal your money?
Lying Liars.
Another of your glaring errors, Sylvestere, since you asked.
I like that you socialists are abandoning the lost cause of Bernie and jumping on the back of a winner, Hillary.
@9:18PM “”HOW MANY YEARS AFTER THE CLINTONS? THIRTY? FORTY?”
The Clinton Presidency ended in Jan., 2001. Not 30-40 years ago.
The Clinton campaign to regain the White House started in 2001. Officially, campaigns for the Presidency in 2008 and 2016.
That sure is the truth about Obama making the mistake of trying to work with those people. I love hearing him jauntily saying how he can say what he wants now, he has no more elections to win. I wish he would’ve said it from day one, if he would’ve he could’ve won with even a greater margin over Romney. The base loved it when he thumbed his nose at them. I don’t think we’ll see this ‘holding back’ from Hillary, or from Bernie.
Nash
Now that I’ve countered the 2000 election, got any other concerns about my list? Or is it just the one?
Hillary has the election in the bag. The first woman president after the first black president. She is the smartest woman in the world.
Nash
Have you no shame?
Right. It would have been much better if we had simply handed the election over to the Republicans. How rude of us.
We were outplayed, out gunned, out monied, out planed, out Bakered, and we didn’t barricade the doors with howling mobs as well. We only had the most votes.
I told you. We don’t do confrontation well. We think you’ll play fair. That was Obama’s problem for the first six years. He thought he was dealing with people who gave a sh*t about the country. Turns out they didn’t.
Hillary probably won the election in that latest hearing. They just HAD to have that one last hearing, lol.
More evidence of Republican immorality from the mouth of the Republican Majority Leader about three weeks ago : The Benghazi hearing was a great success. Look how Hillary is slipping in the polls.
So do post videos of Hillary being grilled or of her murdering Vince Foster. And I’ll follow up with your own Majority Leader and the criminal history of Darrell Issa. And maybe a picture or two of Vitter in diapers.
Paul C. Schulte… We posted at exactly the same time. That statement about “the left accepts elections”, and the right makes excuses like “somebody stoled the election” kind of jumped out, demanding a correction.
Sylvestere…….you should probably review the left”s reaction to the 2000 Bush-Gore election.
It doesn’t fit with your statement that “The left accepts elections. The right can not bear to lose an election. Somebody stoled it”., etc.
Sylvestre,
It’s amazing that the anger of losing two elections has lasted this long. Just wait until they lose 2016. Oy.
YOU Po, are a good man.
In that respect, I am a better Christian than our friend Ruben (and perhaps even David too, as he condones hatred of others), as I respect Jesus’ (Peace upon him) message of love, tolerance and forgiveness.
You guys. Obsessive. Absolutely obsessive.
Can’t STAND to lose a presidential election. Heads explode. It’s killing you that Obama is president.
That’s something else that marks the difference between left and right. The left accepts elections. The right cannot bear to lose an election. Somebody stole it. Some immigrant voted. Some black panthers intimidated voters. Our elections are riddled with fraud. Fraud, I tell you. Meanwhile, where are all the convictions? The only ones I’ve seen are a couple of stupid Republicans. Oh, you’ve got lots of Charges, no convictions. And nevermind about how long people have to stand in line at black polling places. Don’t pay any attention to them. Don’t pay any attention to all the people erased from the voting rolls in purges.
How many years after the Cllntons? Thirty? Forty? And now we have some brilliant Republican congressman who has said he will move to impeach Hillary on day one. Idiots. But that’s what Republicans do.
I don’t care how you assess my opinions. They’re opinions, but I can cite tons of slime flung around by the right – your team. I don’t care how many videos you show of Hillary. Trey Dowdy? What an embarrassment! Darrell Issa? Mr. Arson? What an embarrassment. Dynamic scoring? Lying math. Kenyan president slime? Liars!!!! Hillary lesbian? Political lying slime! Vince Foster murder? Liars. Muslim president? Liars. Ben Carson supplements? Liar. Planned Parenthood slime? Liars. Liars. Liars. Liars. James O’Keefe? Creepy Liar. Murduch News? Slimy English wiretappers.
Slyvestere – wasn’t there some complaint about Bush stealing an election? Isn’t BDS still going on?
David
That is why this is the Bible I read: http://reluctant-messenger.com/essene/gospel_9.htm.
And this is the Jesus (Peace be upon him) that the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) tell us about.
jack:
” Knock it off. That’s not permitted here. Either participate in the discussion or leave.”
———————————————–
You hear, Paul, Nick?
po – still waiting on your answer.
My first instinct was to hate him, as his actions are so revolting, just to be very honest here.
Sylvestre, as. Christian I’m trying to find an ounce of good in everyone, sometimes that’s very hard. I have to work at it, I’m newish at this Christianity stuff. I was an agnostic for many years. But I do buy the message of love that Jesus preached.