Yes. Protests are protected by the Constitution.
No. If protesters stop free speech, they should be removed by police.
If fake protesters & their masters should be prosecuted.
If a person is being unruly and disturbing the peace, there are already laws enough to address such behavior. If a person's conduct does not rise to the level of disturbing the peace, if the local constabulary are not inspired to intervene, then we should not reach farther than that to impute malfeasance on anyone.
The right of the people is to speak freely. The right of the people is to peaceably assemble. The right of the people is to petition the government for redress of grievances. Nowhere in the First Amendment is it found that such rights are contingent upon their expression being of a spontaneous and individual nature.
Regardless of whether protests are "orchestrated"/"organized" or random, within the boundaries of preserving the public peace, all protests are legal, lawful, and deserving of the law's protection.
Congress still passed new federal laws against assinating a President, right? (Making this a new federal violation allows for the involvement of (usually better resourced) federal agencies like the FBI to investigate the case)
I can think of few things more important than protection our Constitutionally guaranteed rights.
Last edited by Devil505; 08-08-09 at 02:07 PM.
That dog will never hunt.
What you propose is to diminish those rights. You are not arguing defense of rights, but denigration of rights; you are arguing a despising of rights.
You seek to silence protest on the capricious and whimsical basis that it is "fake"; that is silencing speech that the Constitution mandates be kept free.
Protest is protected speech. THAT is the Constitutional guarantee.