What’s happening right now in our nation is unspeakably horrific and definitely diminishes the spirit and the will to speak out for fear of backlash, including the very real potential for violence from those who are supposed to protect.
All the more reason that, due to a disheartening local situation in which those supposedly advocating for democracy deemed it their right to suppress a fellow protestor, inappropriately claiming his speech to be inciting violence and therefore “not allowed,” I posted this on Facebook yesterday:
The First Amendment isn’t just a right, it represents a civic duty that some of us took an oath to uphold. It shall not be infringed by individuals, or by groups who think it’s up to them to autocratically arbitrate what free speech and free assembly is. No one is a law unto themselves. And ignorance is no excuse.
There seems to be a disturbing pattern lately where otherwise decent folks are lashing out at each other on social media instead of accurately identifying the true culprit in any given situation. Perhaps in their frustration and rage over police either not doing their jobs to protect protestors (locally here in Otero County, New Mexico) or so-called law enforcement brutalizing and murdering protestors (across the US but most recently in Minnesota), but who can really tell why amongst all the conflict and corruption coming at us constantly?
That’s what happened in Alamogordo yesterday, where a group engaged in protest decided that one among them—who pushed back verbally at one of too many MAGA morons with violent tendencies while operating vehicles who feel the need to show their outrage over weekly protests— was responsible for causing the aggressive reaction (throwing food) at protestors.
As if this obnoxious cretin wasn’t responsible for their own actions when they can’t handle mere words thrown back at them. As if we’re all supposed to remain silent and not agitate those who hate us—and threaten us—for simply being there. And as if placating an abuser will actually keep anyone safe. Women, quite frankly, should especially know better.
Hence, even if the protestor’s verbal pushback was what ultimately led to the violent action of the non-protestor in this particular instance, no one has a constitutional right to not be personally riled, or insulted, nor does being riled or insulted in any way give them the right to act violently. That’s not the way the law works and, quite frankly, it’s common sense for anyone thinking clearly and not believing they are in control of the flipping universe.
Yet, those who saw themselves as “in charge” of this protest—and evidently in control of everyone participating in it on a public city sidewalk—couldn’t step back and see their misplaced blame and ire. Because even if the protestor among them did not remain silent in the face of an asshole’s vitriol, his verbal response of “Bring it on! I’ll kick you ass!” was not unprotected speech. While the reaction to his mere words was violence, make no mistake. It constitutes battery, which is an actual crime.
Not that three roaming police forces (state, city and county sheriff) seem to bother to do anything about these guys, even after one—clearly identified as a Nazi—drove his motorcycle onto the sidewalk in an attempt to mow down protestors on that very street corner just weeks ago. When there are cameras on this city block, as there pretty much are at every intersection in the US since the PATRIOT Act of 2002, purportedly to keep us safe.
But instead of being angry at law enforcement inaction—or police basically saying boys will be boys and perhaps blaming the protestors for being out there in the first place—and instead of blaming the guy who violently threw food because he can’t handle verbal pushback, two people blamed the one doing the pushing back, as was his First Amendment right, whether they choose to comprehend that or not. Because it isn’t up to them to determine if his speech was what they deem “violent” simply because it made them uncomfortable and they didn’t approve of what they unilaterally deemed non-peaceful protest.
And now these folks blame me for attempting to rationally explain that they are not in charge of that street corner; not in charge of First Amendment rights of anyone else protesting; and not entitled to personally define speech falling within the parameters set by the Supreme Court (back when it wasn’t predominated by fascists), including what constitutes unprotected speech due to incitement to riot, not incitement of individual violence as they stubbornly persisted in claiming is the standard to be applied—by them personally.
They dismissed my message first as being uninformed because I wasn’t there to see what happened. This when I was responding to their very public Facebook rant—on a public group page—about what occurred and what they could “not allow” in terms of protest. They dismissed my message by saying I obviously had “strong feelings” about this, as if they weren’t the ones displaying inappropriate emotional rage and autocratically denying free expression by others.
Yes, I do have strong feelings about the First Amendment, not to mention the Fourth Amendment, for starters. But these are not mere feelings that I’m stating, they are fucking facts. And my strong feelings, unlike theirs, stem from actual, earned knowledge of jurisprudence such as a landmark First Amendment ruling from the seventies known as the Fuck the Draft case. If someone can’t respect that, I just might not respect them and their condescending, autocratic, and ridiculously idiotic actions.
I don’t “play” lawyer on social media like they and so many others unfortunately and haplessly do in times like this; I am an actual legal scholar and former lawyer. My statements about First Amendment rights of free speech and free assembly (or separation of church and state, for that matter—also a rampant problem among those supposedly supporting democracy and the Democratic platform in Otero County) aren’t mere opinions. They come from actual legal rulings of which I am knowledgeable—and they clearly are not. Otherwise, I wouldn’t need to point out the obvious. That none of this is up to them.
It is not up to them how anyone protests. It is not up them to police protests. And it is not their place to suppress the right of free speech or right to peacefully protest. They also don’t get to unilaterally define what is peaceful based upon whether they personally feel uncomfortable.
Claiming they were justified in their hissy fit because “no one has a right to harm anyone else”—as if that obliterated everything I or anyone was saying or was even remotely in the ballpark of what I conveyed about the First Amendment—leaves me compelled to respond herein, because I was blocked from replying when they threw a Facebook tantrum and declined to publish all commentary that criticized their stance.
How very undemocratic of a group calling itself Otero County People for Democracy. And immediately changing their group name doesn’t clean the state of their outright stupidity in failing to listen to what anyone else had to say yesterday, especially when they still purport to promote democracy in their new name.
Adding my voice to this issue was subsequently deemed “stirring the pot.” As if democracy were a passive process where no one should question those who have anointed themselves in control of a protest and all protestors. It would be laughable if it were not so sad, and disturbingly ironic. The hubris is gobsmacking, to say the least.
Conveniently dismissing me as not knowing what happened doesn’t change the constitutional facts at play in this situation. Attacking me for not taking their side doesn’t make their position stronger, it eviscerates their purported stance. When one attempts to silence and discredit anyone who doesn’t agree with them, who does that sound like? What does that look like? It sure as hell isn’t democratic values.
I will not be silenced because I know who I am, and what I will always stand for, what I took an oath to stand for. And while I often snark it up about corrupt, greedy lawyers in my Other Worldly novels, the fact is, civil rights attorneys are my rock stars. Unlike poseurs playing at power in Alamogordo and on social media.
I will always take the side of the First Amendment, no matter who is behaving like ignorant fascist bullies. I just wish it weren’t the folks who claim to be on the side of democracy.
Hence, the lawyer in me now responds. If leaders of this group persist in making up petty little rules they think are “laws” to bolster their attempt to defend themselves against the indefensible, such as stating that no one has the right to harm another, then they might want to more succinctly define harm. Because in my estimation, it is they who have harmed the free speech and free assembly rights of others, and done so most publicly, and with heinous hypocrisy.