Federal judge enjoins state from enforcing curfew against Occupy group

[Inthemiddle]

Tenn blocked from enforcing curfew

U.S. District Judge Aleta Trauger issued the order, which state officials did not fight.

"Political expression deserves the highest level of protection and it was unacceptable for the state to suddenly shut down protesters' speech and forcibly oust them from Legislative Plaza that has long been used as a place for peaceful expression," said Hedy Weinberg, executive director at the ACLU of Tennessee.

Can't argue with that.

 

[Oddball]

Translation: The laws to which everyone else must adhere cannot be enforced on leftists.

 

[Photonic]

Translation: The laws to which everyone else must adhere cannot be enforced on leftists.

Translation: The laws upon which this country were founded trump state law.

 

[Oddball]

Translation: The laws to which everyone else must adhere cannot be enforced on leftists.

Translation: The laws upon which this country were founded trump state law.

Using that logic, a case could be made to overturn zoning laws, sanitation laws, restaurant inspections, building codes, fire codes and scores of millions of other state and local regulations....You know, it cramps my right to political expression!!

 

[Inthemiddle]

Translation: The laws to which everyone else must adhere cannot be enforced on leftists.

And how in the Hell do you get that?

 

[paulitician]

The curfew was a bit of a dirty trick. I agree with this Judge on this one. I also have a big problem with the protest permit issue. The costs for these permits have become enormous. That issue will have to be addressed as well. Both tactics seem very Un-American to me.

 

[Oddball]

The curfew was a bit of a dirty trick. I agree with this Judge on this one. I also have a big problem with the protest permit issue. The costs for these permits have become enormous. That issue will have to be addressed as well. Both tactics seem very Un-American to me.

Baloney.

The squatters shouldn't be exempted from any local gathering, camping, vagrancy, sanitation, food service, etcetera laws that every other citizen and group of citizens is expected to comply with.

But they're a bunch of socialist know-nothings, so they get a pass.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Baloney.

The squatters shouldn't be exempted from any local gathering, camping, vagrancy, sanitation, food service, etcetera laws that every other citizen and group of citizens is expected to comply with.

But they're a bunch of socialist know-nothings, so they get a pass.

And what laws are they being exempted from? And on what basis do you conclude they are a bunch of socialist know-nothings? And on what basis do you conclude that it is the reason they are getting a "pass"? In fact, what do you known at all about the matter? You seem to have more ignorant propaganda than you do knowledge.

 

[Photonic]

Translation: The laws to which everyone else must adhere cannot be enforced on leftists.

Translation: The laws upon which this country were founded trump state law.

Using that logic, a case could be made to overturn zoning laws, sanitation laws, restaurant inspections, building codes, fire codes and scores of millions of other state and local regulations....You know, it cramps my right to political expression!!

Except that would infringe on other peoples constitutional rights. Thus is not acceptable.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Simple question? Are they camping there? During the hours of darkness are they pitching tents, laying down sleeping bags, or other sleeping material? Are they cooking here? are they urinating, defecating or otherwise going to the toilet?

Do they block traffic? both pedestrian and vehicular. Are they littering? Do they require increased police presence?

 

[Inthemiddle]

Except that would infringe on other peoples constitutional rights. Thus is not acceptable.

Don't bother, he's arguing an absurdity. He's trying to suggest that if constitutional protections trump state infringements, then that would have to mean that constitutional silences must also trump state regulation and governance of any kind. Don't get drawn into the argument, because he'll eventually draw you into an equally absurd position and then try to use it against you.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Simple question? Are they camping there? During the hours of darkness are they pitching tents, laying down sleeping bags, or other sleeping material? Are they cooking here? are they urinating, defecating or otherwise going to the toilet?

Do they block traffic? both pedestrian and vehicular. Are they littering? Do they require increased police presence?

Honestly, none of that really matters. They are assembled as per their first amendment rights, petitioning their government for grievances.

 

[paulitician]

I just think the curfews are wrong. It smacks of Socialist/Communist totalitarianism. I can't support that. And the protest permit thing has gotten completely out of control. Clearly Governments are trying to stifle the right to protest. The permit issue needs to be taken up in court again. The costs are astronomical. Regular American Citizens cannot afford these costs. It's just wrong in my opinion. We're better than that.

 

[Photonic]

I just think the curfews are wrong. It smacks of Socialist/Communist totalitarianism. I can't support that. And the protest permit thing has gotten completely out of control. Clearly Governments are trying to stifle the right to protest. The permit issue needs to be taken up in court again. The costs are astronomical. Regular American Citizens cannot afford these costs. It's just wrong in my opinion. We're better than that.

We may be better than that, but the people who come up with these laws usually aren't.

A permit to protest isn't necessary on a constitutional scale, and if one could not afford to protest but still did so peacefully, they are completely protected, and anyone attempting to infringe them in such a manner would be doing so against the constitution.

They MUST be allowed to protest regardless of being able to afford it or not, as long as it is peaceful.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Simple question? Are they camping there? During the hours of darkness are they pitching tents, laying down sleeping bags, or other sleeping material? Are they cooking here? are they urinating, defecating or otherwise going to the toilet?

Do they block traffic? both pedestrian and vehicular. Are they littering? Do they require increased police presence?

Honestly, none of that really matters. They are assembled as per their first amendment rights, petitioning their government for grievances.

The right to assemble is not absolute. Nor does it convey the right to LIVE on government property. The right to assemble does not grant the right to impede other citizens movements EXCEPT where a valid permit has been issued with a stated area , time and location specified.

The right of an individual to protest does NOT grant them the right to deny other citizens the RIGHT to use Government property.

One is not protesting while sleeping.

 

[Photonic]

Simple question? Are they camping there? During the hours of darkness are they pitching tents, laying down sleeping bags, or other sleeping material? Are they cooking here? are they urinating, defecating or otherwise going to the toilet?

Do they block traffic? both pedestrian and vehicular. Are they littering? Do they require increased police presence?

Honestly, none of that really matters. They are assembled as per their first amendment rights, petitioning their government for grievances.

The right to assemble is not absolute. Nor does it convey the right to LIVE on government property. The right to assemble does not grant the right to impede other citizens movements EXCEPT where a valid permit has been issued with a stated are , time and location specified.

The right of an individual to protest does NOT grant them the right to deny other citizens the RIGHT to use Government property.

One is not protesting while sleeping.

Sleeping in a certain place can be considered part of the protest however.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Honestly, none of that really matters. They are assembled as per their first amendment rights, petitioning their government for grievances.

The right to assemble is not absolute. Nor does it convey the right to LIVE on government property. The right to assemble does not grant the right to impede other citizens movements EXCEPT where a valid permit has been issued with a stated are , time and location specified.

The right of an individual to protest does NOT grant them the right to deny other citizens the RIGHT to use Government property.

One is not protesting while sleeping.

Sleeping in a certain place can be considered part of the protest however.

Once again, the 1st Amendment does NOT grant the right to LIVE on Government property, nor the right to deny other citizens the use of Government property, nor the right to impede the comes and goings of other citizens.

 

[paulitician]

I just think the curfews are wrong. It smacks of Socialist/Communist totalitarianism. I can't support that. And the protest permit thing has gotten completely out of control. Clearly Governments are trying to stifle the right to protest. The permit issue needs to be taken up in court again. The costs are astronomical. Regular American Citizens cannot afford these costs. It's just wrong in my opinion. We're better than that.

We may be better than that, but the people who come up with these laws usually aren't.

A permit to protest isn't necessary on a constitutional scale, and if one could not afford to protest but still did so peacefully, they are completely protected, and anyone attempting to infringe them in such a manner would be doing so against the constitution.

They MUST be allowed to protest regardless of being able to afford it or not, as long as it is peaceful.

I agree but i'm not sure it's working that way in many areas of the country. You do need a protest permit in most places. And the costs are ridiculous. This will have to be taken to court again. It just seems very Un-American to me. It seems like something China,Burma,and the old Soviet Union would do to curb protests. It's wrong.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Translation: The laws to which everyone else must adhere cannot be enforced on leftists.

Translation: The laws upon which this country were founded trump state law.

Really??

I remember something called the Tenth Amendment.

Not to mention the fucking leftists fight freedom of speech and expression when THEY don't agree with it left and right - not to mention the Second Amendment which they fight tooth and nail...

Once again the Bill of Rights is only applicable when a bitch liberal has something to say, however when the right as something to say it's "hate speech" or if an individual wants to conceal and carry its wrong....

I mean according to this bullshit a 10-year-old has the "right" to protest at 3AM....

 

[Photonic]

The right to assemble is not absolute. Nor does it convey the right to LIVE on government property. The right to assemble does not grant the right to impede other citizens movements EXCEPT where a valid permit has been issued with a stated are , time and location specified.

The right of an individual to protest does NOT grant them the right to deny other citizens the RIGHT to use Government property.

One is not protesting while sleeping.

Sleeping in a certain place can be considered part of the protest however.

Once again, the 1st Amendment does NOT grant the right to LIVE on Government property, nor the right to deny other citizens the use of Government property, nor the right to impede the comes and goings of other citizens.

They aren't living there unless they pick up their mail at that location. Funny how that works.