Skip to comments.Man sues over arrest for wearing "Occupy" jacket in Supreme Court (freeloader seeks 'damages')
Posted on 10/20/2012 1:41:11 PM PDT by Libloather
Man sues over arrest for wearing "Occupy" jacket in Supreme Court
October 18, 2012 | Reuters
A second officer told Scott the jacket was "a sign, a demonstration" that he could not wear inside the court without being arrested for unlawful entry, the suit said. When Scott said that he didn't understand, he was arrested.
Federal prosecutors later dismissed the charge, but Scott is now seeking damages from the government. He argues that he should have been allowed to remain on the property and that his jacket constituted "pure speech" protected by the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment.
(Excerpt) Read more at articles.chicagotribune.com ...
#Occupy the Supreme Court? That sounds like some weird, Nazi BS to me.
Next time, hand the lib-dem-OWS filth a dull knife, and shoot him. Problem solved.
I think this guy has a good case.
Absolutely! The responses on this thread will likely be pretty sickening.
Yeah, the article says that SCOTUS ruled in 1971 that wearing clothing articles with political messages inside courtrooms was protected activity. The guy is going to win.
I'm having a hard time believing this guy's a marine.
The liberal slime ball Don Imus was a marine. He played the trumpet in the marine band.
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
You would think the judge knows the law instead he used his powers for personal views. Sadly most people give up their rights to easily.
Here is some video of this Occupy idiot
Being tossed out of the SC
But his problem is one of JURISDICTION. He’ll have to take his complaint to the House of Representatives just to get the ball rolling......
I agree this guy has a good case for damages.
Free speech protection exists for everyone.
Otherwise free speech is not free...it’s a
privilege. Asshats and idiots get the benefit
of this protection as a price everyone else
must bear for exercising the right to free
speech. Just like Larry Flynt is a scuzzy
lowlife slimy bastage who publishes garbage
and disease but is protected by that First
Darn right he has a good case. See Cohen v. California (403 US 15), the famous “F**K THE DRAFT” case. We may not agree with what he has to say, but we should defend his right to say it!
Didn't get locked up for contempt and was found not guilty of the charge that got me there.
One of the strangest days of my life.
What a jerk, when you go into a court room, the judge is in HIS domain...do what your told or be charged with contempt...or thrown out, or spend an overnight in the pokey...Never say anything that gets the judge angry...Made that mistake once when I told the lawyer that asked me a question....”thats none of your business” JUdge yelled, answer his question....I said I don’t remember how much I have in stock.....judge was satisfied, I answered the question....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.