D.C. Sued over Black Lives Matter Painted on City Streets

[BlueTex]

Yes, it is. Again, try googling "viewpoint discrimination" so you can discuss armed with relevant knowledge. It can help.

Where this is painted in Washington DC the street is named Black Lives Matter... Now, what do you think the city will argue?

 

[trouble13]

Why don't they paint their message on their building?

Whats the problem with them choosing to display it on one the streets?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[diz]

Where this is painted in Washington DC the street is named Black Lives Matter... Now, what do you think the city will argue?

*Sigh*. You didn't google it did you? I think it would help you from harping on irrelevancies.

I don't have much hope you will actually want this knowledge, but maybe this will be help someone who seeks to address this issue with actual knowledge, thought and reason:

Viewpoint discrimination is a form of content discrimination particularly disfavored by the courts. When the government engages in content discrimination, it is restricting speech on a given subject matter. When it engages in viewpoint discrimination, it is singling out a particular opinion or perspective on that subject matter for treatment unlike that given to other viewpoints.

...

Because the government is essentially taking sides in a debate when it engages in viewpoint discrimination, the Supreme Court has held viewpoint-based restrictions to be especially offensive to the First Amendment. Such restrictions are treated as presumptively unconstitutional.

...

A good example is Congregation Lubavitch v. City of Cincinnati (6th Cir. 1993), which dealt with expressive access to Fountain Square, a public square in downtown Cincinnati.

For many years, the city had allowed a broad range of private groups to erect expressive signs and exhibits on the square and to leave them there for short periods of time. But the city was not so agreeable when it was approached, separately and persistently, by a Jewish congregation and the Ku Klux Klan, both of which sought to erect overnight displays on Fountain Square.

Instead of granting these requests, the city quickly enacted a new ordinance that banned all overnight displays on the square, except those sponsored or co-sponsored by the city. Thus the new ordinance gave the city complete freedom to discriminate between favored groups — such as the Kiwanis Club, an Oktoberfest committee, and a librarians’ organization — and disfavored groups — such as the Jewish congregation and the Klan.

Because the city was using its new ordinance to invite or exclude each group based on its identity and message, the city was engaged in viewpoint discrimination.

Viewpoint Discrimination | The First Amendment Encyclopedia

 

[Drawdown]

D.C. Sued over Black Lives Matter Painted on City Streets | Judicial Watch


Should judical watch be allowed to paint their message on the street too?
Why or why not?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Never thought about it, but yes. The government has to be content neutral or they get themselves in a whole lot of legal bills.

 

[Aurora]

I think people should stop behaving like animals. We don't need this BS during a pandemic.

It's election time. The left is really playing the race card. Dumb people play along.

 

[Fishking]

and despite your show of false courage you FAIL utterly to point out what I said that is not correct.

I have already, you just lack the ability to realize it.

 

[Aurora]

People torching and looting are "peaceful protesters" in your world?

The term looting is now " a racist comment" as it implies primarily certain groups do it.

 

[notquiteright]

Yes, they would have to allow people to do the same level of speech another group was given the right to.

Including the KKK or Anon??? There are limits to what is protected by free speech but I'm on record for liking that quote to be in front of the White House and maybe even Capital Hill... eace

 

[ludin]

What does an abuse of our court system have to do with "First Amendment Rights"?

there is no abuse of the court system. the city can't refuse them. the city opened themselves up to the liability when the allowed blm on the street.

they have to treat everyone equally.

 

[ludin]

Old white ****s matter.

i thought leftists hated lies? i guess that is a lie as well.

 

[ludin]

If they paint 'No one is above the law' at 1600 Penn Ave NW I'm 1000% on board... eace

they can paint it where ever they want.
only people that think they are above the law are leftists.

 

[BlueTex]

*Sigh*. You didn't google it did you? I think it would help you from harping on irrelevancies.

I don't have much hope you will actually want this knowledge, but maybe this will be help someone who seeks to address this issue with actual knowledge, thought and reason:



Viewpoint Discrimination | The First Amendment Encyclopedia

So the city can’t name the street Black Lives Matter Plaza?

 

[ludin]

Judicial Watch is a right wing racist extremist organization ........... believe it.

The streets belong to all taxpayers .......... Black Lives Matter are exercising their right to communicate in a non-racist fashion.

more leftists blathering or bloviating as they put it just dismiss it for what it is.

 

[ludin]

Including the KKK or Anon??? There are limits to what is protected by free speech but I'm on record for liking that quote to be in front of the White House and maybe even Capital Hill... eace

as long as they did not put anything on the street that would violate the first amendment then yes.

the city opened themselves up to the liability.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Old white ****s matter.

Sounds like you are prejudiced against elderly white people.

 

[ludin]

Why don't they paint their message on their building?

they don't have too. see the first amendment.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

I agree with Judicial Watch. They should have the right for the head of Judicial Watch to have his neck knelt on for eight minutes, killing him, and for the organization to then get to paint a message on the road about it.

That is incoherent.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

What you don't understand is that the government represents the public, and not every private citizen or group has the same role. So the government might name a school for someone, and that doesn't give every citizen the right to rename it how they want. If they want it renamed, they can win elections and get government that agrees.

Why are you equating school names and monuments to city streets being used for political messaging?

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Judicial Watch is a right wing racist extremist organization ........... believe it.

The streets belong to all taxpayers .......... Black Lives Matter are exercising their right to communicate in a non-racist fashion.

Nah...the racist organization is the Ku Klux Klan....founded by democrats. Your presidential candidate, Joe Biden even claimed a former klan member who had advanced to the rank of "grand cyclops" as his friend and mentor.

 

[jotathought]

Why don't they paint their message on their building?

Don't ask me .. the mayor of D.C. set the precedent. Why didn't she paint the message on nearby buildings instead?

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Yes, the owners of the street in DC authorized it.

Which owners are you referring to? Name them.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Any changes to a public city street are the province of the government of the city of Washington DC. The mural was painted by the Department of Public Works at the direction of the elected mayor. The city government is responsible for it.

However since they made the decision to allow the street to be used for political slogans by one group, they must also allow other groups the same opportunity. Otherwise they are violating first amendment rights. You allegedly taught government classes for three decades. You should be able to grasp that.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

And the cons are doing somersaults to pin that on the Democrats. Why? Because you see the Republican's poll numbers and you're desperate.

Same polls that told you that Hillary Von Pantsuit was going to be your president in 2016. Huh?

 

[notquiteright]

People torching and looting are "peaceful protesters" in your world?

A few hot heads and criminals using the protests as cover doesn't paint all the protesters as anarchists, communists, and whatever blather comes from tRump and his supplicants... eace

 

[haymarket]

I have already, you just lack the ability to realize it.

You saying that you already proved I was wrong is worth exactly NOTHING if you cannot even me the post let alone reproducing it. It is that really stale and old "you find it" crap that reeks of trying to get out of a corner you constructed for yourself.