Here in St. Louis the National Park Service does not allow video taping on the grounds of the St. Louis Arch without first getting permission. Obviously they don’t enforce it unless they need an excuse to boot somebody.
This does seem to be patently unconstitutional.
Is that ice I see in Hades? The ACLU defending a non-Lib must have their founders spinning in the underworld.
Can we next expect to see them defend the other 9 parts of the Bill of Rights? (Holding breath & turning purple)
If you would like to be added or dropped from the Michigan ping list, please freepmail me.
Part 2 of the ongoing Lennox/Peters saga. Interesting stuff. I hate it when I agree with the ACLU about anything, but, well, there ya go.
According to the ACLU, this is not their concern. Their concern is the ban on videotaping only.Yeah, and I believe 'em. /sarc
“Much as I hate to say it, I {gulp} agree with the ACLU on this one.”
No, they are wrong.
It is not about suppression of “free speech” or suppression of political advocacy - no one is preventing Lenox from doing his political advocacy - but, a college campus, your shopping mall, an office or office building is not treated the same as the public square, they are given the status of private property and as such those who own/control that property are given leeway, in first amendment considerations, to reasonable rules regarding activities that take place on the property and mostly that the rules are applied equally. Unless someone demonstrates that the rules being applied to Lenox have not been required of others or are not being applied in equal fashion, I doubt the ACLU position will be upheld. Maybe, they are just looking for some GOP support.
>>Much as I hate to say it, I {gulp} agree with the ACLU on this one.<<
The ACLU is right a lot and does good. But they are infested with an obsession of censoring public expression of Christianity.