The First Amendment protects Americans’ freedom of speech and assembly. Unfortunately, at various times in US history, our law enforcement and intelligence agencies have disregarded these protections, targeting people or groups based on political viewpoint, religious affiliation, or participation in lawful protests. The advent of the internet as the new “town square,” has opened a new front in the battle to protect free speech and assembly, and new technologies make it easier for the government to track our communications and movements both on and offline, inhibiting our willingness to dissent.
Undercover agents have infiltrated law-abiding activist groups, police have beaten and tear-gassed protesters at peaceful protests, and people are considered suspect merely because of their real or perceived Islamic faith. On the internet, police and intelligence agencies monitor social media and speech that should be protected by the First Amendment is considered evidence of “material support for terrorism.”
Dissent is being criminalized by DHS Terror Threat Assessments that name environmentalists, practicing Muslims or people with Ron Paul bumper stickers as potential terrorists, by legislation that conflates activism with terrorism (as in the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act), and by over-policing at protests and restrictive “free speech zones.”
The Congressional Research Service recently released a report that explores when it is permissible for the government to restrict online speech that advocates for terrorism.
In response to revelations that the FBI and DHS have been spying on Black Lives Matter, Occupy, anti-pipeline activists and peace and solidarity activists, individuals and 131 civil society organizations asked the House and Senate Judiciary Committees to find out the true extent of improper spying.
“During the House Science Committee’s hearing on its Constitutional authority to issue subpoenas one name got bandied about quite a bit–Wilkinson.”
As D.C. Ruling on DAPL Pipeline Draws Near, Local Authorities Escalate Intimidation Tactics and Mischaracterization of Water Protectors
Lawyers and others at the Standing Rock encampments share a growing concern about the increasingly intimidating practices of the State Police and the local Sheriffs in coordination with Dakota Access Pipeline’s own security force (including their continued use of canines). Of particular concern are exaggerations and misstatements by authorities that challenge the protesters’ commitment to non-violence.