Category: First Amendment

The role of the U.S. government in the law enforcement response to protests

by · May 2, 2022 12:14 pm

A new report published by the Niskanen Center discusses some possible strategies that the U.S. federal government can use to help law enforcement better respond to protests and crowded events. When responding to protests, law enforcement officers are expected to apply proportional and impartial strategies to preserve public safety but also protect constitutional rights of free speech and assembly. There are many deficiencies in the current way that law enforcement responds to protests, though, including: 1) patterns of disproportionate response, such as tendencies to both under- and over-respond to public safety threats; 2) reliance on outdated training, strategies, and tactics; and 3) providing guidance to state and local agencies that lacks an evidence base.

The law enforcement response to protests varies a lot by locality, but the federal government can help shape this response both directly and indirectly. As a direct form of assistance, the federal government can respond to protests on federal property or in and around federal buildings. For example, federal law enforcement agencies typically are responsible for policing protests that occur in Washington, D.C., as it is a federal district. Federal law enforcement can also be called on to provide mutual aid in communities. When it comes to indirect assistance, the federal government can play a role by training state and local police agencies on responses to crowd management and civil disturbances, something that is offered by many federal agencies. For example, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provides training to law enforcement agencies at local, state, and federal levels, while the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC) provide training to federal law enforcement personnel.

Continue reading . . .

Criminal Witch-Hunting

by · Jun 19, 2020 11:28 am

When does the present witch-hunt atmosphere cross the line from merely deplorable into criminal? A Vermont school board may have crossed the line. They have removed a school principal from her duties, put her on administrative leave, and stated a determination that “she will no longer lead our school.” That is, they have stated an intent to remove her from her position permanently. See this press release. And what was the principal’s offense that warranted this action? She posted on her personal Facebook page, not a school page, a statement refusing to grovel in front of the Black Lives Matter movement and endorse everything they do and demand. In my opinion, this is a crime under federal civil rights law, 18 U.S.C. § 242.

Continue reading . . .

USCA9 Gets Quill-Lashing From Unanimous SCOTUS

by · May 7, 2020 2:36 pm

The U.S. Supreme Court severely admonished the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today for reaching out to recast a case to present issues not raised by the parties. The opinion was unanimous, written by Justice Ginsburg. The Ninth Circuit panel, at the time of the recasting, consisted of Judges Reinhardt, Tashima, and Berzon.

In United States v. Sineneng-Smith, No. 19-67, the high court disposed of the case saying,  “we vacate the Ninth Circuit’s judgment and remand the case for reconsideration shorn of the overbreadth inquiry interjected by the appellate panel and bearing a fair resemblance to the case shaped by the parties.” In judicial-speak, that is a stern rebuke. Continue reading . . .