Clark v. CCNV/First Amendment

Answer questions; No minimum nor maximum, as long as you answer it. Answer in 1,2,3 form; no essay.

(1) What communication(s) led to the defendant being arrested or otherwise sanctioned?

(2)Who prevailed (the government or the communicator?)

(3)What reasoning did the Court use to support its decision? In other words, what rule did the Court use to decide the case and how did they apply the rule to the communication at issue?

(4)Do you agree or disagree with the Court’s decision? Briefly explain why.

(5)Following the shooting of Michael Brown by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, there were ongoing demonstrations in the town. The people who came to protest or bear witness were predominantly peaceful. However, some people who came to the area vandalized businesses or threw objects at the police.

After several days, law enforcement officials began enforcing a rule that demonstrators could not stand in place, but must keep moving. Officers were told that they could use discretion in enforcing the rule, but not given any criteria by which to employ that discretion. If demonstrators wished to stand still, they needed to move to a “Protester Assembly Zone” which was situated away from the main area where the protests were taking place and out of sight of the area reserved for the media to gather. The site had no restrooms or water facilities.

Mustafa Abdullah worked for the American Civil Liberties Union. His job included attending protests and demonstrations and counseling participants on their First Amendment rights. He would meet with groups of people and distribute “Know Your Rights” cards. His job duties also included observing the protests. During the course of his work at Ferguson, he was often standing still as he spoke with groups of participants about their rights. He also was asked to stop and pray with demonstrators. Abdullah did not participate in the demonstrations and he did not want to engage in civil disobedience or be arrested.

Abdullah argued that the “keep moving” rule violated his First Amendment rights. Is he correct? Defend your answer, based on the test in Clark