Archive for the ‘First Amendment’ Category

Paxton unblocks nine Texans on Twitter after lawsuit claiming he violated First Amendment rights – Chron

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has unblocked on Twitter the nine Texans who sued him after they say they were unconstitutionally blocked for criticizing him or his policies on the social media platform.

In a lawsuit filed in April, a group of Texans said being blocked from viewing Paxtons tweets from his @KenPaxtonTX account was a violation of the First Amendment because it limited the rights of people to participate in a public forum and access statements made by the public official.

READ ALSO: Ken Paxton says he doesn't support Greg Abbott for reelection - then tweets that he does

The ACLU of Texas and the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University represented the Texans in their lawsuit. According to their statements from a Thursday press release, Paxton has unblocked the nine Texans in the ongoing lawsuit challenging Paxtons practice of blocking critics from his Twitter account.

Paxton has also blocked many other individuals from the @KenPaxtonTX account based on their viewpoints, according to the lawsuit. The plaintiffs had asked Paxton to unblock them and everyone else who was blocked from the @KenPaxtonTX account based on their viewpoints, but its unclear if people not named in the lawsuit have been unblocked.

Lyndsey Wajert, a legal fellow with the Knight First Amendment Institute, said while Paxton has unblocked the nine Texans, the case has not been dismissed.

Paxtons office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Katie Fallow, a senior staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute, said multiple courts have recognized that government officials who use their social media accounts for official purposes violate the First Amendment if they block people from those accounts on the basis of their viewpoints.

READ ALSO: Twitter sues Texas AG Ken Paxton, asks court to halt his investigation

Were pleased that attorney general Paxton has agreed to unblock our plaintiffs in this lawsuit and are hopeful that he will do the same for anyone else he has blocked from his Twitter account simply because he doesnt like what they have to say, Fallow said in a statement.

Kate Huddleston, attorney for the ACLU of Texas, said the ruling is a step in the right direction, but it remains to be seen whether Paxton will unblock other Texans. She said it shouldn't take a lawsuit for Paxton to comply with the Constitution.

Attorney General Paxton cannot prevent Texans from exercising their First Amendment rights, including their right to criticize his policies and qualifications in their responses to his tweets, Huddleston said in a statement.

The Texas Tribuneis a nonpartisan, nonprofit media organization that informs Texans and engages with them about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Continued here:
Paxton unblocks nine Texans on Twitter after lawsuit claiming he violated First Amendment rights - Chron

Korrie Wenzel: Trustworthy news, opinion help us stay informed – Grand Forks Herald

As a kid, I thought whatever was written in the press had to be the truth, in black and white, she wrote to Forum Communications Co., which operates newspapers, television and radio stations and specialty websites in Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin. Today, there is more opinion presented as truth, making it harder to disseminate the truth. This has led to more separation between people.

Kathy wrote that after our company called out to readers, seeking questions and concerns about the First Amendment, freedom of speech and the news media in general.

Probably unknowingly, she summed up the focus of an FCC project that kicks off today one we hope will help readers better understand how Forum Communications and the media operate as they strive to present factual and unbiased news. Well explain the differences between news and opinion, as well as this companys reporting processes.

And above all else, we hope the series will educate readers and writers alike on the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech, religion and the press, as well as the right to assemble and petition the government.

The schedule:

May 2: What is the First Amendment? What isnt the First Amendment?

May 3: The impact of the internet and social media on free speech principles.

May 4: Differences between news and opinion.

May 5: How does the reporting process work?

May 6: Craft a great letter to the editor.

May 7: Exercising First Amendment rights in the real world.

The project stems from concerns from news media and news consumers alike. Journalists are worried by what some in our industry feel is a decay of news literacy how to read the news and understand what, exactly, is being presented. As consumers are bombarded with content, the line between opinion and news begins to blur. Authenticity, verification and facts dissipate as questionable content is posted, tweeted and sent to the masses. The result, at least for some, is a growing distrust of news sources, even if news sources arent necessarily to blame for the questionable content.

Its a disturbing trend.

Consider a 2017 study conducted at the University of Illinois, which concluded that the more you know about the news media and how it works, the less likely you are to believe conspiracy theories.

Now would be an opportune time to admit that even Forum Communications image could use some work. A recent survey that polled readers throughout the companys footprint showed that 84% of respondents said neutral/unbiased news is important, but 60% said we perform well in the category.

We did much better in other relevant categories, getting a 78% score in accurate/factually correct and a 78% in credible/trustworthy. Considering attitudes toward the media these days, we consider these scores commendable yet worthy of continued focus.

We at FCC strive to present our news factually and without bias, but we realize some readers simply dont understand how the process works or, importantly, the key points of the First Amendment.

We firmly believe that to actively engage in democracy requires consideration from both sides the news media and its faithful, yet often skeptical, consumers. Trustworthy news and, yes, even opinion pieces editorials, columns and letters to the editor help us stay informed while promoting healthy dialogue and, in the end, more informed conclusions and beliefs.

And when that happens, perhaps we can grow just a smidgen closer, rather than farther apart.

Too utopian or idealistic? Is it beyond hope in an increasingly divided and angry society?

Perhaps.

But listen to Kathy.

We are supposed to be respectful of differences and tolerant of varying opinions, she wrote. The web world is allowed to edit out the truths they dont believe in. We are supposed to be respectful of differences and tolerant of varying opinions but instead we are being polarized into separate boxes.

She concluded: Find joy. Give joy.

Amen to that, Kathy.

Korrie Wenzel is publisher of the Grand Forks Herald.

View post:
Korrie Wenzel: Trustworthy news, opinion help us stay informed - Grand Forks Herald

Commentary: How to live your First Amendment freedoms – Press Herald

Recent months have shown that the phrase free speech is often misunderstood. Americans generally know about the First Amendment, but most cannot name the five freedoms it guarantees the freedoms of religion, speech, press, peaceful assembly and government petition.

Through my work with the First Amendment Museum in Augusta, Ive encountered many people who do not know how to put their First Amendment rights into real, concrete practice. Here are five examples of living your freedoms:

HOSTING A FAMILY DINNER

When I was growing up, my family sat down for dinner together every single evening. It was during those family dinners that we had our most robust, informative conversations, touching on politics, religion and everything in between. From a young age, I learned how to express myself and listen to others, in case I might learn something. And I often did.

While family dinners are less common nowadays, they represent a comforting example of lively discourse. We can learn a lot from our family members, with the tool of free speech in our toolbox.

GETTING A LIBRARY CARD

Of course, theres more to learning than just eating with the family. Even the simple act of obtaining a library card and roaming the stacks of books reinforces the pivotal role that free expression has played throughout human history. Libraries are filled with thousands of books on a wide range of topics, but that would never be possible if the writers couldnt express themselves freely.

Now, we can all reap the benefits of their speech, using it to elevate our own knowledge in many different ways.As the French philosopher Rene Descartes once said, The reading of all good books is like a conversation with the finest minds of past centuries.

USING SOCIAL MEDIA

Perhaps the most popular form of free expression today is social media. Whether youre using Facebook, Twitter or something else, technology has gifted us with unprecedented platforms, which can be used to engage with and contact millions of people around the world.

We can not only post whatever we want (for better or worse), but we can also learn from all sorts of interesting people from family and friends to influencers overseas. Even clicking send on a single tweet is an example of the First Amendment at work.

GOING TO CHURCH

While the First Amendment is most commonly associated with free speech, there are four other freedoms:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

For example, freedom of religion is what enablesmillions and millions of Americansto attend church, synagogue, mosque or other house of worship. Whatever your religion, it isAmericanfor you to be able to worship as you choose, without government interference. From Christianity to Pastafarianism, which is the worship of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (yes, its real), we all have the freedom to get in touch with the divine.

PROTESTING PEACEFULLY

The First Amendment also affords us with another freedom: The right of the people peaceably to assemble.

And Americans are living it now more than ever. Last year,as many as 26 million people joined the Black Lives Matter protests after the tragic deaths of George Floyd and other African Americans. They took to the streets, marching, mourning and advocating for change. This also happened during an election year, which saw tens of millions of Democrats and Republicans mobilize on behalf of their respective candidates.

And it was all possible because freedom includes the right to peaceably assemble. Emphasis on the word peaceably: Americans can and should assemble nonviolently, without any rioting, looting and other forms of violence.

So get out there and live your five freedoms! As Americans, the best way to show gratitude for the First Amendment is by exercising it in our daily lives.

Invalid username/password.

Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.

Previous

Next

Continued here:
Commentary: How to live your First Amendment freedoms - Press Herald

In Hoboken, is fight over social media about First Amendment or weaponizing politics? – ROI-NJ.com

Hoboken Councilman Phil Cohen said the ordinance he is cosponsoring with two other council members, the one that would prohibit elected officials from blocking constituents on social media accounts, is about the First Amendment.

The question is whether it is a little political, too.

The ordinance, which Cohen said will be introduced at the Hoboken city council meeting Wednesday, calls for a $500 fine for each person blocked by an elected official. The reason, Cohen said, is simple.

Its about the First Amendment, he told ROI-NJ. This is about social media being a town square.

When elected officials are only interested in hearing people who agree with them, thats censorship. Thats a violation of the First Amendment. And the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals have been very clear that elected officials cannot do this on social media.

Cohen also said the ordinance is pointed specifically at a fellow councilman, Mike DeFusco.

There happens to be recent blocking activity by a councilperson that prompted this, Cohen said.

This is where the story on First Amendment rights involving social media may be better framed as one that follows the first rule of governing: All politics is local.

Cohen said DeFusco is blocking constituents who are drawing attention to a recent issue involving DeFusco renting his apartment on Airbnb during the pandemic (see story here by Hudson County View).

DeFusco, an open member of the LGBTQ community, said he was blocking people because he has been attacked for his personal life.

He calls the ordinance an overreach. He doesnt feel it will pass. And, if you want to talk First Amendment issues involving social media, DeFusco said hes happy to do so. This dispute is not about that, he said.

For starters, DeFusco who said he intends to form an exploratory committee regarding a run for mayor this fall said its a political attack.

Its also a personal one, he said.

Ive been attacked as the only out LGBTQ member of the city council and in all of Hudson County, he said. I began blocking people that attacked my partner, that attacked my family, that have made homophobic slurs to me.

This is nothing new. Its been going on since Ive been in public office for six years.

DeFusco said human rights top all.

Social media is a toxic place, he said. I am a public official, but Im also a human being. When my family is brought into the topic, Im going to take protective actions.

He estimates he has blocked 15 people the past six years, but he said thats no longer the case.

The gray area here is whether a quasi-political policy account counts toward any relevant law or relevant rulings, he said. But, out of an abundance of caution, Ive since unblocked everyone. Theres no issue.

Cohen said its important to codify what should be an understood truth.

There are elected officials who are choosing to communicate about official business on social media platforms, so that they can get their message out to the community, whatever their political interests may be, he said. And, when you put ideas into the social media marketplace, those ideas can be shut down, disagreed with argued with. Thats all fair game.

No ones requiring community leaders or elected officials to have social media accounts. But, if you have them, you shouldnt be shutting down dissent, or people who disagree with you or people you dont like.

Councilwomen Tiffanie Fisher, who said she plans to vote No should the ordinance come up, said it has little to do with the First Amendment and everything to do with political retribution.

If someone knows a politician can be fined for blocking them, they can attack them for anything they want because they know they are unable to block you. It really can be predatory at a local level.

Fisher said First Amendment issues are issues for the courts.

If someone really felt my blocking them was a violation of their First Amendment rights, then they have an avenue to file a complaint. One exists right now: The courts. This just weaponizes local politics. Thats all it does.

Cohen isnt convinced. He said politics is politics.

If youre blocked, you cant question, you cant criticize, you cant mock, you cant satirize, he said. What would America be if you couldnt make fun of your politicians? Thats as American as apple pie.

Read the original post:
In Hoboken, is fight over social media about First Amendment or weaponizing politics? - ROI-NJ.com

Internal NYPD Documents Show Cops Were Sent to Protests With Barely Any First Amendment Training – The Intercept

Last year, after New York officials announced a plan to dispatch 500 additional police officers to the citys subway system, a coalition of activist groups organized a series of protests.On January 31, they held a day of transit action that saw small demonstrations pop up at stations and on trains across the city. Fuck your $2.75, a flyer promoting the event read, referring to the cost of a subway ride. Public transit should be free, read another, which means free fares, free of policing, free of accessibility barriers, free to sell churros, free to dance, free to sleep.

The flyers, along with other protest-related literature on topics like what to do if arrested, ultimately made their way into instructional materials used by the New York Police Departments Police Academy, the six-month training all aspiring cops go through at the beginning of their career. The protest literature propaganda, as the NYPD referred to it was included in a Police Academy student guide on civil disorder and came with a warning: The FTP (F**k the Police) group, also known as Decolonize this place and shutitdown, considers themselves an activist group that claims to fight for the rights of the poor and indigenous people, the guide noted, mischaracterizing what is actually a loose formation of several groups that shared the materials. This group has been responsible for vandalizing NYPD vehicles and property, entering the transit system without paying, and additional illegal destructive behavior.

The NYPDstudent guide on civil disorder was part of a cache of internal documents obtained by The Intercept in response to a public records request for protest-related police training materials. The documents, which we are publishing with this story, also include instructor and student guides as well as class slides and quizzes on the topics of officer discretion, maintaining public order, and custodial offenses, which include resisting arrest and obstructing governmental administration, two of the most frequent protest-related charges.

An organizer who is involved with Decolonize This Place told The Intercept he was not surprised to learn that the NYPDs training included literature by the FTP formation, which can stand for Feed the People and Fight the Power, in addition to Fuck the Police. Theres a long history of the police or the police state or the intelligence trying to understand the way others do stuff, said the organizer, who asked for anonymity for fear of being targeted by the NYPD and right-wing media. What weve put out, we think of it as public knowledge that is not readily available for people, to protect privacy and to keep people safe. That its perceived as threatening I dont know what to say about it.

This flyer, distributed by a coalition of activist groups in New York City, was included in instructional materials used by the New York Police Department to train new officers.

Image: NYPD

No part of the academys basic curriculum is specifically dedicated to the policing of protest,even as officers are frequently deployed to do so, leading to frequent abuses and fierce backlash against the department. Instead, lessons about other aspects of the job, like how to take an uncooperative person into custody, include nebulous protest-related tidbits, such as advice on balancing the NYPDs position as guardian of public order and its stated commitment to safeguarding constitutional rights. It is important in our democratic society that the rights of assembly and the freedom to peaceably protest be protected, officers are taught, according to the documents obtained by The Intercept. At the same time, these rights cannot be used as an excuse for violence nor may the exercise of those rights unnecessarily interfere with other important rights, such as those of non-demonstrators.

The NYPD, the training materials claim, has a tradition of restraint and great success in handling the most sensitive demonstrations with respect for the rights of both demonstrators and the general public. Time and again, we have earned our reputation as the finest police department for handling demonstrations.

Together, the documents offer an overview of the NYPDs protest-related training that is striking for its vagueness and the lack of practical guidance to back the departments declared commitment to the rights of protesters. The key to quelling a civil disturbance without a need for force is the threat of force, coupled with tight discipline and control, one of the documents reads. A well-disciplined, well-armed unit creates the impression of a powerful, competent police force. Usually, a large, overpowering police presence will stop rioters in their tracks. If force must be used, remember to use only the minimum amount necessary to control the situation.

Corey Stoughton, an attorney at the Legal Aid Society, which together with the New York Civil Liberties Union has sued the city over the polices violent response to last years George Floyd protests, said the training on protesters constitutional rights is practically meaningless. Were talking about a maximum 45-minute discussion session on how to protect peoples First Amendment rights at protests, she said. The tools you walk out of that training room with, as an officer, are all geared towards finding ways to justify the arrest of protesters, rather than finding practical ways to facilitate peaceful protests and the exercise of free speech rights.

Stoughton, who reviewed the documents obtained by The Intercept, noted that while they contain rhetorical commitments to protesters rights, they focus almost exclusively on ways police can limit them: The only practical information you would leave a training like that with is, How can I arrest protesters?

John Miller, the NYPDs deputy commissioner for public information, wrote in an email to The Intercept that the NYPD handles five to 10 protests daily, the vast majority without incident. Policing a peaceful protest requires very little specialized training, he wrote, adding that the more complex aspects of the training have to do with disorder control. Finding the right balance in policing protests does not come with certain or obvious answers, it is an ongoing process.

A police officer shines a flashlight on protesters participating in a day of transit action against increased police presence in New York City subways on Jan. 31, 2020.

Photo: Aidan Loughran/NurPhoto via Getty Images

In the aftermath of the police brutality displayed during last summers uprising, a series of official reports denounced the departments failure to adequately train officers ahead of the protests. Most cops had not received protest-related training since leaving the academy years or even decades earlier. Thereviews drew a distinction between the Strategic Response Group, a heavily militarized, rapid-response unit that has an estimated 700 members and receives specialized training, and the rest of the NYPDs 35,000 uniformed officers.

In a 115-page report, the Department of Investigation, an independent agency overseeing city government, concluded that other than for personnel assigned to SRG, DOI found that, prior to the Floyd protests, NYPD lacked standardized, agencywide, in-service training related to policing protests. The DOI added, NYPD appears to have deployed a large number of front-line supervisors and officers to police the Floyd protests without adequate training. The conclusion was echoed by the citys law department, the Office of the Corporation Counsel, which wrote in its own report that for a majority of the officers who were assigned to the George Floyd protests, their training on policing protests was limited to what they had received as recruits in the Academy.

When criticized for using force against protesters last summer, the NYPD responded in part by noting that hundreds of its officers were injured in the course of doing their job. Miller, the deputy commissioner for public information, repeated that claim in his statement to The Intercept. Police officers who received basic training in handling peaceful protests were challenged by situations in which protests often shifted from orderly to disorderly, he wrote. While they tried to make arrests of only individuals for specific acts of violence or property damage they often found themselves struggling with groups of people trying to de-arrest those individuals.

Miller also noted that only 69 of the 976 complaints made against individual officers last June and July named SRG officers, which he suggested may be due to the advanced training SRG officers receive in team tactics for arrests that are specifically geared to reduce injuries to those being arrested and to the police officers arresting them. Yet the SRG was heavily involved in some of the most brutal repression of protests in the wake of Floyds killing last summer, including the violent arrestsof at least 263 people police had trapped in the streets at a June 4 protest in the Bronx. Last month, The Intercept published a series of SRG training documents that reflect the units heavy-handed approach to the policing of protest: coaching cops on tactical maneuvers and mass arrest scenarios, as well as providing additional training for SRGs distinctive armor-clad bike squads.

NYPD SRG officers arrest a protester during a Black Lives Matter demonstration over the murder of George Floyd in New York City on May 28, 2020.

Photo: Johannes Eisele/AFP via Getty Images

Facing backlash over its handling of the protests, last summer the NYPD expanded the training it gives all officers on the force. The new training includes subjects like the the Mobile Field Force, crowd management versus crowd control, crowd psychology, protester roles and tactics, the Handschu agreement a consent decree prohibiting the NYPD from engaging in purely political surveillance formations, flex-cuffing, mass arrests and team carries, according to NYPD spokesperson Sgt. Edward D. Riley.

The DOI noted that while it was unable to conduct a full assessment of the new training, it determined that much of it appeared to consist of disorder control tactics like those deployed by the SRG. (The topics identified by Riley also appear in the SRGs training materials.) The new training has limited emphasis on de-escalation and effective communication with protest participants in an attempt to maintain peace and order, the agency concluded. That scenario-based training appears focused solely or primarily on crowd control tactics and formations with no discernable reference to managing interactions, facilitating First Amendment rights, and minimizing the use of force.

Asked whether the new departmentwide training was modeled after the SRGs, Miller, the deputy commissioner, told The Intercept that it followed the Federal Emergency Management Agencys Center for Domestic Preparedness curriculum and includes protecting and facilitating demonstrations as well as training in the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution regarding the right to protest and equal protection under the law.

Still, critics of the NYPDs response to protests are warning against calls for more training that they fear will result in the entire department getting schooled in the ways of its most militarized unit. One of the open questions is: Is the new training a distillation of the SRG training? said Stoughton, the Legal Aid attorney. In which case, whats the basis for thinking that thats going to change anything about the NYPDs response to protests?

There has been little researchon the effectiveness of police training, yet calls for more training regularly follow high-profile instances of police abuse. Critics say this response only directs more resources to police departments while failing to tackle the underlying cultural issues at stake.

Its a stopgap cosmetic measure that costs more money, Joo-Hyun Kang, director of Communities United for Police Reform, a coalition of community organizations, told The Intercept. Really, the way that we reduce this level of violence is we have to reduce significantly the bloated budget, the outsized power, the scope, the size, and the footprint of the NYPD.

These flyers, distributed by a coalition of activist groups in New York City, were included in instructional materials used by the New York Police Department to train new officers.Credit: NYPD

The instruction materials obtained by The Intercept offer a glimpse into the way the NYPD conceives of its role and history in relation to protest.

One of the major reasons that New York City is so frequently selected as the site for National Conventions is this Departments reputation for handling demonstrations by communicating with all parties, the materials note. This has been a dramatic change from the practices of some other police departments, which have emphasized the deployment of SWAT teams and aggressive crowd control techniques.

The documents credit such success to the 1994 establishment of the Disorder Control Unit, or DCU, the precursor to the SRG, and claim that since its establishment, New York City has not been the victim of any large-scale civil disorder. That telling fails to mention that the DCU was central to some of the most brutal repression of protest in city history, including the 2011 Occupy Wall Street protests and the 2004 Republican National Convention, where large-scale police abuses led to a historic $18 million in legal settlements.

Theres really no question that part of what played into the violent response to the protests this summer was the NYPDs failure to absorb lessons from litigation and complaints that emerged from its response to prior incidents, said Stoughton. What the summer made clear was that the NYPD has not fully grappled with that history.

As documents obtained by attorneys over the years reveal, little has changed about the NYPDs protest-related training despite countless lawsuits and court rulings critical of its conduct. In a classaction lawsuit seeking to represent hundreds of protesters arrested last summer, attorneys argued that the NYPD failed to train its officers about how to protect First Amendment activity since at least the 1990s, when the DCU was created. Despite the wealth of evidence of NYPD members historical brutality against protesters, [the city] has ignored, and/or failed to utilize, relevant information, including information gleaned from reports and lawsuits, as well as other data points, to identify deficiencies in NYPD training as it relates to constitutionally compliant protest policing.

While none of that recent history features into the NYPDs training documents, the materials do refer to the polices position, historically, as the target of protests they are tasked with controlling. In fact, most of the riots in this country over the last half-century have been started by what, justifiable or not, were believed by citizens to have been abuses of police discretion, the documents note. It is sobering to reflect on all the damage that has been caused by controversial decisions made by police officers on the street.

The documents briefly acknowledge law enforcements role in stirring or exacerbating major instances of civil unrest in the early 1990s, like the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles and the unrest in New York Citys Crown Heights neighborhood. They also note that, in the 1960s, police had become the source of great controversy and remark on how, following the civil rights movement, suddenly, government commissions and scholars found the police very interesting. The training materials say in recent years, some of the most serious allegations of police discretion have been claims that it has been abused, and degenerated into racial profiling.

The documents warn officers that demonstrators feel strongly about their cause and call on them to recognize this intensity, treat it objectively and professionally, and not allow ourselves to be hooked into the emotion of the moment.

Even when protesters criticism is directed at police themselves and takes the form of chanted curse words and personal insults, the documents encourage officers not to lose control and overreact to the verbal abuse. The documents say, Regardless of your personal feelings towards the demonstrators or the object of their protest, you must remain neutral. A lack of professionalism or the use of unnecessary force against civilians damages the relationship between the Department and the community, as well as the Departments image.

NYPD SRG officers stand guard at a protest in Union Square in New York City on Nov. 5, 2020.

Photo: Stephanie Keith/Bloomberg via Getty Images

While police officers generally have broad discretion to decide how to address a situation, the documents emphasize that such individual discretion can be taken away during protests. At some demonstrations, you may be directed to follow orders scrupulously and to exercise no individual discretion whatsoever, one module notes. Do as you are told.

That exception to the rule also appears in the SRG training documents published by The Intercept, making clear that protest-related decisions during the Floyd protests like ones to surround protesters in a controversial maneuver known as kettling, or to make mass arrests were not made by individual officers. The resulting violence, the documents suggest, was not a matter of lone cops going rogue but policy deliberately sanctioned by department leadership.

Before every demonstration, the Departments operational and intelligence experts try to find out everything possible about the demonstrators and their cause, and how they intend to get their point across, the documents state. Based on this analysis, the Department develops a very precise strategy for policing the demonstration. At times, this may require that every officer play a specific and defined role, as part of a highly coordinated team effort that allows for no variance.

The training materials make repeated references to court rulings in favor of protesters right to assemble and warn that attempts to regulate activities that are classified as pure speech have failed constitutional muster. These statements, however, are invariably followed by examples of things police can do, within the bounds of the law, to restrict protests. The fact that conduct may be permitted under the First Amendment does not mean that the government cannot regulate that conduct in some way if the overwhelming needs of the rest of society require it, the documents note, citing traffic congestion, pedestrian congestion and inconvenience to others as justification for intervention.

The documents then elaborate on how officers can arrest protesters in a legally defensible way. The general policy of the New York City Police Department is to warn non-violent demonstrators before making arrests, the training notes. Otherwise, an immediate arrest will be viewed as an attempt to interfere with the rights of the protesters.

That kind of approach implying that constitutional rights should only be protected enough to avoid legal repercussions are indicative of an underlying antagonism by police toward protesters that no amount of training can fix, critics have long maintained. A better solution to avoid violent repression of protest, they add, is considering whether police need to be there in the first place.

Why are there so many police at protests? Do we even need police at protests? asked Kang, of Communities United for Police Reform, adding that, at best, police at protests handle traffic control that can easily be left to civilians, and at worst, they escalate tensions and infringe on protesters rights. Theres a much bigger question of, whats their role, and should police even have a role?

More:
Internal NYPD Documents Show Cops Were Sent to Protests With Barely Any First Amendment Training - The Intercept