The thorny issue in the past years has been one of how authorities ought to treat demonstrators and public advocacy exhibitions. The varied responses toward protests have raised a challenging question: trying to harmonize free expression with public order and security. The central tenet should be that protesters are treated based on their actions, not the content of their ideas. This approach ensures the enforcement of laws remains unbiased and consistent across the political spectrum.
The Problem with Partisan Enforcement
This unequal treatment based on party loyalty by local officials has become evident in recent developments. San Francisco's progressive-leaning District Attorney, Brooke Jenkins, meted out relatively light sentencing to protesters who interrupted the Bay Bridge. At the same time, Georgia's Republican Attorney General, Christopher Carr, charged protesters at a police training compound with domestic terrorism. Such a partisan approach undermines the principles of the First Amendment, which guarantees free speech without regard to the content of expressed ideas.
Historical Perspective on Free Speech
The Supreme Court's 1977 decision in National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie confirmed that free speech protections cover even the most offensive opinions. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) defended the Neo-Nazis' right to march through a predominantly Jewish neighborhood, emphasizing that laws limiting speech could also be used to block civil rights advocates from marching in the future. This landmark case highlights the importance of distinguishing between the content of speech and the actions of protesters.
Applying Consistent Standards
Authorities are expected to apply consistent standards when handling protests, focusing on the level of disruption rather than the content of the protest. Consistent unfair treatment is not superficial, and there are well-grounded explanations from both right-wing and left-wing protesters. Illustrations here are abundant, with the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 and the Capitol riots of January 6th serving as concerning examples where different groups perceived unequal enforcement and prosecution.
Practical Measures for College Campuses
Campuses are often hotbeds for activism, and administrators must navigate between supporting free speech and maintaining order. College campuses should balance free speech with the need for a functional and safe educational environment. Administrators should establish clear policies that permit peaceful protest while preventing the disruptions to campus operations. Expulsions should be considered for repeat offenders who engage in disruptive activities, while recognizing that disciplinary actions should not be solely based on speech.
Guidelines for Handling Protests
To ensure fairness and uphold the principles of free expression, authorities should adopt the following guidelines:
1. Zero Tolerance for Violence
Violent acts by protesters must not be tolerated, as they infringe on the rights of others. Authorities should arrest and punish individuals who engage in violence, regardless of the cause they support.
2. Establish First Amendment Zones
Authorities should create designated areas where protesters can peacefully and prominently express their views. These zones should be in key locations, such as near administration buildings or major entrances, to ensure that protesters' voices are heard without disrupting public order.
3. Avoid Collective Punishment
It is unjust to hold all protesters accountable for the actions of a few. Authorities should identify and prosecute individuals responsible for violence or property destruction rather than applying blanket punishments to entire groups.
4. Protect Speech While Regulating Actions
Authorities should differentiate between speech and actions, protecting the former while regulating the latter. No student or protester should face expulsion or arrest solely for their speech. However, when speech turns into bullying or targeted aggression, authorities must intervene.
5. Use Expulsions Judiciously
In educational settings, authorities should warn students that continued disruptive behavior may lead to expulsion. This approach encourages students to express their views in non-disruptive ways and maintains order without resorting to excessive force.
6. Use Minimal Force
Authorities should use minimal force when dealing with protesters, as violent confrontations often escalate tensions and lead to negative public perceptions. Patience and measured responses are crucial in maintaining peace and order.
7. Maintain Ideological Neutrality
This demands that authorities remain ideologically neutral, treating all protesters equally in their rights, regardless of how far left or right they may stand on the political stage. This then assures that future activism is responded to consistently and fairly, thus encouraging a healthy free expression of ideas.
Conclusion
When handling protesters, authorities must adopt a balanced approach, allowing for free expression while maintaining public order and safety. By focusing on the actions of protesters rather than their ideas, authorities can ensure that laws are enforced fairly and consistently. This approach not only aligns with First Amendment principles but also contributes to a more just and equitable society.