On Friday, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit that sought to challenge the constitutionality of protest curfews imposed in New York City during the 2020 demonstrations following the murder of George Floyd. The curfews were in effect for one week in response to widespread protests against police brutality.
The plaintiffs in the case, Lamel Jeffrey, Thaddeus Blake, and Chayse Pena, were arrested and charged with violating the curfews. They subsequently filed a lawsuit, claiming that the curfew restrictions violated their First Amendment rights to free assembly and their Fourteenth Amendment protections against unlawful arrest. In 2022, a federal district court dismissed the case, ruling that the curfews were a legitimate public safety measure that did not infringe upon their constitutional rights, as they "left open ample alternative channels for expressive activity."
The appeal was heard by a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Circuit Judge Reena Raggi wrote for the unanimous panel and affirmed the district court’s decision. Judge Raggi emphasized that the curfew was imposed in response to escalating violence, destruction, and looting in various parts of the city. The court noted that the curfew was a temporary measure, implemented only after traditional policing methods were deemed insufficient, and was lifted as soon as the situation stabilized, even concluding a day earlier than initially planned.
The court's decision aligns with longstanding judicial precedents that allow government entities to impose certain time, place, and manner restrictions on assemblies, provided that these regulations do not target the content or messaging of the protests and are implemented for legitimate public safety purposes. The U.S. Supreme Court first established this principle in the 1941 Cox v. New Hampshire case, which recognized the government's ability to impose reasonable restrictions on public demonstrations.
As a result of this ruling, the plaintiffs' arrests under New York law remain valid. However, the broader legal battle surrounding the rights of protesters during the George Floyd demonstrations is far from over. Several related cases are still pending in courts across the country.
The First Amendment protects the right to assemble and protest. But, as history has shown, this right is not absolute, and government officials, including police, can restrict the exercise of free speech as long as they use “reasonable force.” A recent ruling by the Ninth Circuit said that police used... Read More »
A federal judge dismissed almost all claims that were filed by activists, civil liberties organizations and other protesters that alleged former President Donald Trump and other U.S. officials violated federal civil rights laws by forcefully clearing activists in order to make room for a presidential photo-op. On June 1, 2020,... Read More »
New York Attorney General, Letitia James, has filed a lawsuit against the New York Police Department (NYPD), its leadership, and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio. In the lawsuit, James highlights the NYPD and the city leadership's unjust treatment of protesters over the past summer. James specifically points to... Read More »
Seventy-four days after George Floyd was killed by a police officer kneeling on his neck, demonstrations continue to erupt in cities across the U.S. The turbulence brings police officers, lawmakers, and protesters into conflict. What right, if any, does the government have to regulate civil dissent? The First Amendment protects... Read More »
