Florida Judge Sued After Banning Protestors From 'Questioning Integrity Of The Court'
from the that-old-first-amendment... dept
Florida certainly has its reputation for general nuttiness, and sometimes it goes beyond the prototypical "Florida Man" to the "Florida Judge." Last week, Florida judge Mark Mahon decided that because he personally couldn't take a little criticism from protestors outside the courtroom, he could unilaterally suspend the First Amendment of the Constitution, leading him to issue a hilarious order barring people from demonstrating anywhere near the courthouse if those demonstrations included mocking judges:Demonstrations or dissemination of materials that degrade or call into question the integrity of the Court or any of its judges (e.g., claiming the Courts, Court personnel or judges are “corrupt,” biased, dishonest, partial, or prejudiced), thereby tending to influence individuals appearing before the Courts, including jurors, witnesses, and litigants, shall be prohibited on the Duval County Courthouse grounds….The order further stated that anyone exercising such a First Amendment right could be "found in criminal contempt of Court." Considering that he's already stomping on the First Amendment, perhaps it's no surprise that he falls back on the misleading-to-wrong anti-free speech trope of "yelling fire in a crowded theater."
[T]he proper procedure for challenging a court’s decision is to file an appeal with the appropriate appellate court. Shouting out on the Courthouse grounds that the Court and judges are “corrupt” during business hours while people are entering the Courthouse is entirely inappropriate and disruptive and is analogous to falsely shouting “fire” in a crowded theater....Eugene Volokh quickly pointed out how ridiculous this order is and Popehat followed up as well:
So who were these demonstrators that Judge Mahon was so upset about that it made him completely forget the very First Amendment to the Constitution? They were associated with the site Photography Is Not A Crime, better known as PINAC, and who we've written about/linked to many times for exposing ridiculous efforts to bully photographers/journalists/citizens exercising their rights to photograph and videotape in public (including the actions of public officials). Mahon was hearing a case involving a PINAC reporter who had been arrested concerning a demonstration against the TSA. Other PINAC folks were demonstrating outside of this case, leading to Mahon's order.This is flatly unconstitutional. Demonstrations and leafleting are protected speech under the First Amendment. So, for that matter, is flag-burning and walking around on stilts as a giant puppet of Uncle Sam. Burning a giant photograph of Judge Mahon, a public figure and a judge no less, would be protected speech.
And sidewalks surrounding a courthouse are a public forum, the sort of place the founders envisioned protest, and flag-burning, and giant puppets, and burning giant photographs of Judge Mark Mahon. Indeed, the United States Supreme Court has held that its own adjoining sidewalks are a public forum where demonstrations, leafleting, and giant puppets are allowed.
The sidewalks comprising the outer boundaries of the Court grounds are indistinguishable from any other sidewalks in Washington, D.C., and we can discern no reason why they should be treated any differently. Sidewalks, of course, are among those areas of public property that traditionally have been held open to the public for expressive activities, and are clearly within those areas of public property that may be considered, generally without further inquiry, to be public forum property.
Demonstrations, signs, and leaflets outside public courthouses may be quite triggering for the sensitive souls who work there, but they have an alternative: GET A REAL JOB IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR. You can put black robes on a goon like Mark Mahon, but a goon he remains. He has no business enforcing the law, much less making up new law of his own goonish devising.
In response, PINAC has filed a lawsuit against Mahon in which they argue that Mahon's order violates their First Amendment rights and asks for a temporary restraining order against Mahon's order.
In response, Mahon quickly "scaled back" his original order, but didn't get rid of it completely.
Mahon wrote a new administrative order that “vacates and supersedes” the previous one. It continues the ban against photography of secure areas and security features, but he eliminated the ban against protests that question the court’s integrity.The new order is certainly better and appears to remove the reference to "fire in a crowded theater" along with the clearly unconstitutional ban on calling the integrity of the court into question. But it still seems pretty clearly targeted at protected activity that the judge doesn't like. He tries to present it as being all about safety, but that seems like a tortured attempt to ban a form of protest that he doesn't like. PINAC claims it will continue to fight the new order as well. One hopes, as part of this process, Judge Mahon familiarizes himself with the Constitution that he's supposed to be enforcing.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: courts, demonstrations, first amendment, florida, free speech, judge, mark mahon, pinac, protests
Companies: pinac
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
So he's banning the courts own security cameras. Genius.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't know about that court but in my area the security cameras are in the common areas and the public hallways, not in the courtrooms. Any camera in the courtroom itself is likely approved (or controlled) by the judge.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Photography is a crime
If you don't believe these things can be used for crimes, I will point you to the simple fact that a large expensive heavy camera lens can be used to club someone over the head, and a camera bag could hide terrorist things, like film or (gasp!) SD cards.
Photography (and the intarwebtubes) represent a threat to the state that is at least as bad as the printing press. Therefore new regulations must be required. (Don't get me started about the dangers of 3D printing and how the sky is falling.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Photography is a crime
Ye see, its not photography that is a crime.
The "crime", is the gathering of information that might cause members of the Ownership Society, or their Owned representatives, such as police or judges, some embarrassment, by exposing their officially approved wrong-doing.
Its a "public-only" crime, in that only members of the general public face any kind of punishment if caught gathering such possible "information".
Its sort of a precursor ruling to the kinds of full fledged laws currently being initiated in Spain, where the Fascists have taken over completely and now must seriously face organized public dissent and so need new laws to make any kind of dissenting public reaction, illegal.
But not to worry, you'll soon be seeing these kinds of new laws too.
Fascism is inevitable, as well as fatal. Al they need for America is another major war and then the kid gloves will come off completely and it will be "Papers please." for the USA too.
---
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Power Trip
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Someone report this guy to the Department of Redundancy Department please...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"they have an alternative: GET A REAL JOB IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR."
I'm pretty sure the Honorable Mr. Mahon continues to be a judge not due to his competence but rather because it is a secure position he cannot afford to abandon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If only
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Unless of course, they don't....
Unless of course, the laws have secretly changed and no longer actually do apply to everyone equally any more. :)
After all, how can one have an Ownership Society, where those who own the infrastructure and property of a nation have rights, if everyone else also has the same rights??
Somebody has to become the underdog, the servant, the slave, the peasant, for the Lords of the Land to be able to hold their heads high and spit on their inferiors.
Maybe the laws of the land have changed, while you were asleep, dreaming the American Dream....
---
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bieber effect
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stand on the sidewalk outside a courthouse and try handing out pamphlets on Jury Nullification and see how long it takes before you're told to leave or be arrested.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The PRO-stitution of the United States of Amnesia
Or perhaps, its time for the US public to consider familiarizing itself with the new Post 911 version of the Constitution.
You know, the one which the USG gave itself the right to re-interpret the words of, after 911, because - terrorists!!!!!
After all, according to the new definition of the constitution, it may actually be the judge who is following the laws of the land and enforcing the constitution correctly.
Oh. Damn. That's right. I forgot.
The new definition of the constitution is a national security secret, so the public cannot familiarize itself with the new definition of the constitution that the USG has secretly initiated.
My bad. Never mind then.
---
[ link to this | view in chronology ]