MILWAUKEE (CN) — Protesters had their first day in court on Wednesday in their lawsuit challenging the city of Milwaukee's restrictions on their plans to demonstrate at the Republican National Convention — less than two weeks before the convention is set to begin.
The Coalition to March on the RNC sued the city about a month ago claiming restrictions on protests enacted in light of the convention’s security plan — and after much foot-dragging by city officials — unconstitutionally abridge its members’ rights to free speech and assembly.
Representatives for city agencies and politicians like Mayor Cavalier Johnson say they are working in good faith to facilitate peaceful demonstrations at the convention while prioritizing the safety of everyone involved.
But the group of protesters says the accommodations are inadequate, in part because they don't allow protesters to be seen or heard by convention attendees, and vice versa. The American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the group, opposes the security plan overall and says it concedes too much to the RNC at the expense of protesters.
The ACLU and the city failed to resolve their legal dispute at a mediation session about two weeks ago, leading to oral arguments on Wednesday that lasted more than three hours.
In a packed courtroom at the Milwaukee federal courthouse, the coalition defended its motion for a preliminary injunction that would allow the group to march along its chosen route and prohibit part of a city ordinance that allows withholding parade permits based on past criminal convictions for violence at similar demonstrations.
ACLU attorney Timothy Muth said that after months of his client filing multiple applications for parade permits, with no response from the city, Milwaukee officials and the U.S. Secret Service offered a parade route that is “constitutionally insufficient.”
Chiefly, the city’s route is smaller than what the group proposed, he said. It's also too far away from the Fiserv Forum, home of the Milwaukee Bucks and one of a handful of sites for the convention’s activities, including the actual nomination of the GOP presidential candidate.
“Protest marches are temporal,” Muth said. “Location matters.”
U.S. District Judge Brett Ludwig resisted the characterization of the First Amendment as encompassing both speech and a speaker’s intended audience in the way Muth described.
“I think that’s wrong,” said Ludwig, a Donald Trump appointee, adding that the First Amendment does not give a speaker the specific right to speak directly to “people they want to hector.”
Muth also argued that, at the urging of the Republican National Committee, city officials and the Secret Service altered the convention’s security zones to include a downtown Milwaukee park near where the protesters planned to march. The ACLU lawyer showed a letter from Republicans’ lawyers painting the coalition as potentially violent troublemakers, calling it evidence of discriminatory intent.
Assistant city attorney Julie Wilson insisted that city officials have a significant government interest in public safety that must be weighed alongside the protesters’ First Amendment rights.
She also argued the challenged city ordinance and security plans are content-neutral, despite the plaintiff’s arguments that the nature of its speech was part of what sparked the restrictions.
Another attorney for the city, Clint Muche, outlined some practical requirements at play in deciding the parade route, including the need to allow passage for emergency vehicles through spaces where vehicular traffic will be restricted.
The plaintiffs have not met the high burden for their injunction, Muche argued, and it is too late to make those kinds of changes anyway after two years of planning for the convention.
Mike Carter, a U.S. Department of Justice lawyer representing the Secret Service, also said security and logistical requirements made the protesters’ preferred parade route unworkable. The asymmetrical “octopus” shape of the most restrictive security zone at the convention proves it was narrowly tailored to balance everyone’s competing interests, he said.
Ludwig acknowledged the time crunch parties find themselves in with the convention only 12 days away. The judge said he would issue a decision on the plaintiffs’ injunction motion as soon as possible.
On the courthouse steps after the hearing, Coalition to March on the RNC representative Omar Flores told a crowd of reporters that the time, place and manner of their planned march — noon on Monday, July 15, in front of the Fiserv Forum — is crucial because the group has it “on good evidence” that that is where Republicans will be giving speeches at that time.
Flores said he was confident the coalition would be permitted to march along its proposed parade route — not that a win in court would necessarily change their plans.
“We will be marching that route whether we get a permit or not,” Flores said, adding that he expects around 5,000 people to march with the group.
Follow @cnsjkelly
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
Campaign finance laws July 3, 2024 -
Redistricting Mississippi July 3, 2024
-
Labour landslide anticipated as Brits head to polls July 3, 2024 -
