Carry Your Signs High!

On Wednesday, newly appointed Commandant David Erwin had his Capitol Police arrest eight people who had the audacity to exercise their First Amendment Right of Free Speech inside the Capital.

Keep in mind that they weren't disrupting anything, causing a disturbance or behaving out of line in any way, shape or form. They were just holding signs.

On Thursday, the stormtroopers infringed on the constitutional rights of three more people.

But they stopped suddenly and arrested no more.

Why is that? Well, because word came down that what they were arresting people for is perfectly legal, even under the Republicans' draconian rules.

Dane County Judge Frank Remington issued his ruling on a lawsuit filed by people arrested last year. Part of his ruling held significance for the crackdown on Free Speech:

"...the language of § Adm. 2.07(2) does not prohibit the Plaintiffs' conduct. The title of the rule is 'exterior and interior displays and decorations.' The text of § Adm. 2.07(2) states that the DOA's express written permission is required for a sign to be 'erected, attached, mounted or displayed.'
"Here, the Plaintiffs were issued citations for holding a sign on the first floor of the rotunda. As such, their signs were not 'erected, attached, [or] mounted,' which therefore means that their actions could only fall within the text of § Adm. 2.07(2) if their signs were 'displayed.' However, the word 'displayed' implies something more than an individual holding a handmade sign over their head. Instead, as is generally known, the Capitol rotunda is frequently a place where freestanding artwork and such things are showcased, especially around the holiday season.

"The term 'displayed' implies something like a freestanding exhibit showcased in the Capitol, not an individual holding a handmade sign over their head comparing the governor to a character in a comic book. Thus, the terms of § Adm. 2.07(2) does not prohibit the Plaintiffs' conduct. Second, the DOA's new Facilities Access Policy supports the conclusion that § Adm. 2.07(2) did not apply to the Plaintiffs' conduct. (Lazar's First Aff. Ex. C). The Policy defines an 'exhibit' as '[a]ny display of... signs or banners not held by an individual.'"

The whole decision can be found here.

The Solidarity Singers were planning on showing up in mass tomorrow as a sign of, well, solidarity. And if the police tried to squelch their rights they'd come back in even greater numbers, just as they have done before. I'm sure they'll be bringing other friends as well.

I hope they do follow through with their plan, just to remind Walker and the other Republicans that there reign is fleeting.

As Representative Tamara Grigsby said after the first day of arrests:

“These heavy-handed tactics in the name of ‘safety’ put our Constitutional rights in peril. We must not only support but celebrate the right of the people to express themselves peacefully, regardless of who is exercising the right or what the message is.

“This is especially true in our Capitol, the People’s House. If basic democracy has no place here, where does it belong? The Capitol Police should be protecting people as they exercise their rights, not arresting them.”

Now, I'm sure that Scott Walker and his teahadist supporters are gnashing their teeth out of frustration from being foiled by the Constitution once again, they really should be sending letters of gratitude to Judge Remington.

After all, if he had not made that ruling, the police would have kept infringing on the people's constitutional rights. That, in turn, would lay the groundwork for the most expensive and historic class action civil rights lawsuit ever seen in this state. The state would have been sure to lose that fight as well. Ultimately, it would have cost taxpayers millions of dollars.

Unfortunately, Walker and his supporters won't ever do that. They simply can't think things through that far, otherwise they wouldn't even be doing what they are doing.