The next (permanent?) TFR

Ghery said:
Should have been circling Washington DC with that message.
Click to expand...

I predict a lot of congress critters in DC will not be reelected.
They have not cut the spending, they only agreed to not spend as much in the future as originally planned. What a farce.
 
gprellwitz said:
She reportedly wanted to, but that pesky ADIZ got in her way.
Click to expand...
Hmmm Possible lawsuit maybe that the ADIZ prevented her from exercising her 1st and 14th amendment rights?

She was denied her right to petition government for redress of grievances in the manner she felt most appropriate. Would not the The Hauge vs CIO case be appropriate here since the airspace is a public place and she was denied her right to peaceably assemble in a public place. The case struck down a city ordinance that was used to restrict public protests.

The relevant part being of the decision being:
Justice Roberts, in an opinion which Justice Black joined and with which Chief Justice Hughes concurred, found protection against state abridgment of the rights of assembly and petition in the privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. ‘‘The privilege of a citizen of the United States to use the streets and parks for communication of views on national questions may be regulated in the interest of all; it is not absolute, but relative, and must be exercised in subordination to the general comfort and convenience, and in consonance with peace and good order; but it must not, in the guise of regulation, be abridged or denied.’’
Click to expand...
 
ScottM said:
Hmmm Possible lawsuit maybe that the ADIZ prevented her from exercising her 1st and 14th amendment rights?

She was denied her right to petition government for redress of grievances in the manner she felt most appropriate. Would not the The Hauge vs CIO case be appropriate here since the airspace is a public place and she was denied her right to peaceably assemble in a public place. The case struck down a city ordinance that was used to restrict public protests.

The relevant part being of the decision being:
Click to expand...

The 14th is not relevant, the SFRA/ADIZ/Whatevery-they-wanna-call-it is a purely federal issue, and the 1st Amendment applies directly to the feds without needing to jump through the 14th Amendment hoop you do for states.
 
ScottM said:
Hmmm Possible lawsuit maybe that the ADIZ prevented her from exercising her 1st and 14th amendment rights?

She was denied her right to petition government for redress of grievances in the manner she felt most appropriate. Would not the The Hauge vs CIO case be appropriate here since the airspace is a public place and she was denied her right to peaceably assemble in a public place. The case struck down a city ordinance that was used to restrict public protests.

The relevant part being of the decision being:
Click to expand...

To paraphrase the TSA, you have no right to any particular means of petitioning government. You still have the right to petition, you don't have the right to petition by banner-tow.

This is exactly the same line the TSA gives to people that object to airport searches on 4th amendment grounds: while you have a right to travel, you have no right to travel by air.

The Administration could fix this if they wanted to....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top