I'm looking at the Supreme Court paragraph you inserted. In it the person writing the article claimed that their decision could wind up limiting the First Amendment rights of Americans to organize protests.
Not true.
The so-called BLM protests were "not" actual protests which are allowed, but rather rioting, violence, arson and assault on a large scale.
Our supreme law, the U.S. Constitution, clearly spells out that the people "have the right to PEACEFULLY assemble." It does not say that the people have the right to commit arson, assault people, smash windows and loot. Once you've crossed the line of "peaceful assembly," you've broken the law and have to be punished.
The original BLM founders claimed in front of cameras that they were "trained Marxists (Communists), were going to burn the "system" down and proceeded to scam people out of funds to simply fill their pockets, instead of helping the black communities.
The fact that they claimed to be Marxists (Communists) whose goal was to burn the system down (which by extension would include the US Constitution) and committed wholesale violence in their acts, to me, is plainly "traitorous!" They should have been gathered up, locked up and the key thrown away.