Supreme Court Declines to Hear Salute To Veterans Appeal

[Eric Friedebach]

From today's ICAS fastFacts email:

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Salute To Veterans Appeal

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the Salute to Veterans Corporation's appeal of a ruling that allowed protesters to hand out leaflets and carry signs during the annual air show. In 2004, Salute to Veterans asked police to remove several anti-war protesters. The American Civil Liberties Union sued the air show and the city, claiming that the protesters' First Amendment rights had been violated. Salute to Veterans had argued that it should be able to determine who participated in their event.

In 2006, a district court judge ruled that the public had a right to protest at the show because the involvement of the local government in the coordination of certain aspects of the show had made the air show event organizers "state actors." Salute to Veterans sought to overturn that decision earlier this year in the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals and lost. That left the U.S. Supreme Court as the final option for Salute to Veterans.

"The situation is still somewhat unsettled, but air show event organizers should be aware that the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion in this case could have a long-term negative impact on an air show's ability to control its ramp and limit disruptions," said ICAS President John Cudahy. "As things stand right now, by involving local police, crash/fire/rescue or even the FAA, an air show may change its legal status in unanticipated ways."

[Bill Greenwood]

I feel a conflict in this debate as I believe in both sides; I am of course, in favor of having the airshow, or shows, however I am very much in favor of free speech. Sometimes this Democracy stuff can get complicated. I think it is a huge overreaction to claim that this ruling is going to imperil shows all over the country. Why not hold the show, have some fair and resonable accomadation for protestors? Everyone needs some manners and respect for other people's opinion and it should work out. Logic would say one side cannot take a public facilty like an airport and exclude other people from peacefully and legally expressing their veiw. And this seems to be what the court has said and by not hearing the case the Supreme Court has in effect agreed with the lower court.

[RyanShort1]

I dunno Mr. Greenwood - Yes the FAA, local fire departments, and others are there and it's at the local airport, but if you "rent" or have the rights to use an area for an event - it's YOUR event. Yes, the FAA and others are there - but I'd bet that's more because they pretty much have to be for safety's sake - not just 'cause you like to hang out with them.
To me, it's like saying that they can crash your party just because of the venue you chose because there's a public sidewalk there - and because you're on land that you owe the government property taxes on and because your using the public water supply - and the public waste systems. I guess they may have the legal right to do protest - and obviously the esteemed judges think so, but they are only human and can make mistakes, too. It's fine for the protesters to protest, but instead of crashing the airshow producers party they should have their own party - I shouldn't be forced to provide for them to express their beliefs if I don't believe in them - If they crash my party - I'll respect their "legal" rights to do so - but they are total idiots in my book if they choose to do so, and in my opinion, that's shouldn't be any more protected than crying fire in a theater.
Well, maybe I got a little too bothered.

Ryan

[RyanShort1]

BTW - "free speech" isn't always so free on public property - I've been at some National Park Service locations where on at least one occasion a Park Ranger tried to stop a Christian group from peaceably assembling to discuss the historical events that took place on site and the Christian heritage of the men involved in the event.
Even on public property there are rules.

Ryan

[Bill Greenwood]

Ryan, I would expect the actions of the Park Ranger were certainly not very polite and smart, and possible illegal. His mistake does not justify a similar act of censorship at the airshow.

[RyanShort1]

Bill,

I'm responding via PM as I don't want to go too far on this thread!


Ryan

[bdk]

Hey, as long as they buy a ticket, who cares? Just make sure there are a bunch of trash cans nearby to prevent littering when folks throw away the stupid leaflets. Wouldn't want those to get sucked into a Skyraider carb intake. They just need to remember that this gives me and my friends the equal right to stand there and belittle them, call them cowards and otherwise try to make their lives miserable.

Last edited by bdk on Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Jerry O'Neill]

My response to protesters has been the same for about 20 years now. I walk up to them and thank them for being here and then explain that their very presence at the event is because of the people who fought and died so that we would all have the right to free speech.
Usually they suddenly speechless. (When I think about it, it's pretty funny actually )
Jerry