Jeremy Kessler Reviews “Liberty’s Refuge’ And “Speech Out Of Doors” | The New Republic
BROOKFIELD PROPERTIES, the owners of Zuccotti Park, never imposed rules restricting the use of their space until Occupy Wall Street arrived. Only then did Brookfield prohibit (among other activities) “camping and/or the erection of tents or other structures,” “lying down on the ground, or lying down on benches,” and “placement of tarps or sleeping bags or any other covering on the property.” Standing before Justice Michael Stallman of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, OWS’s lawyers argued that Brookfield’s post-facto rules and the city’s enforcement of them—which entailed evicting their clients—were clearly intended to suppress First Amendment rights of speech and assembly.
Since when did “First Amendment rights of speech and assembly” apply to private property?
Your first amendments rights stop at my property line, you fucking lefty moochers, looters, thieves, addicts, and bums.
“We never banned such activity before because no one ever had the unmitigated gall to try and do it. It’s our property, we’ll regulate offensive behavior as we wish.”
If their lawyers don’t argue that line, they need new lawyers.
Your own first amendment rights can be abridged by your own homeowners association, as can your gun rights.
Private property is just a bundle of rights, and it all depends on the contracts.
Private property is really, really, really private is constitutional wishful thinking. Having been on the wrong end of lawsuit by a homeowners association, I speak from experience.
Collectivism on the behalf of developers. Talk about the axis of evil!
So…which due process of law permitted the Zucotti bums to squat there, and/or which compensated taking allows them to pretend that this private property has become public property?
GB, I’m having a hard time understanding how you compare the two situations. Typically, you agree to be governed by the homeowners association with regards to your property. I doubt the owners of Zuccotti Park agreed to be governed by the ows scumbums.
Sorry, but this is only a half-true statement at best, and it’s total bullshit when it comes to firearm rights as expressly guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
First Amendment-guaranteed rights can be voluntarily forfeited, in part, to a homeowners’ association, but no such organization can “abridge” Second Amendment-guaranteed rights. A homeowners’ association has no legal authority over Constitutionally-guaranteed rights in general, and cannot legally enforce any sort of control over any of those rights that you do not voluntarily give them. Unless there’s something in the association’s legal covenants to which you have voluntarily agreed in writing regarding your firearms or self-defense rights (which would be a pretty astoundingly-stupid thing to do, IMHO), they simply can’t tell you what you can or cannot do WRT those rights or the free expression of them.
This, again, is only (sort of) half-true – property “owned” in conjunction/connection with a homeowners’ association is only in certain respects “private property” anyway. This is why I personally refuse to have anything to do with any variety of the property-owned-in-common arrangement that is the actuality in “owning private property” that is subject to a homeowners’ association. I already have several levels of actual Gubmint trying to nanny-smack me around about what I can or can’t do with the property I pay the mortgages on. Why would I want yet another layer of petty, bureaucratic pains in the ass trying to force me to do what they consider a requirement?
Not if you know the rules of the game, stand your ground legally and refuse to take “you must obey!!” as the final answer. Also, of course, you need to choose your fights carefully – some “wins” aren’t worth the trouble and expense.
And I don’t really care about your “…speak(ing) from experience.”, either, nor does the law. I’ve gone a few rounds with the rampant idiocy of homeowners’ associations, too, years ago and before I learned better. So far, my life score stands at: One loss, two wins ( spread over two different properties). Win some, lose now and then – as I said, you pick your fights.
If you didn’t read or didn’t understand what you signed yourself into, of course, sometimes the laws can’t help.
No petty local association can subvert the Constitution, though – and true rights are inherent; Constitutional guarantees are just that, not the rights themselves.
Discussions re: homeowners’ associations’ pros and cons don’t have anything to do with those #OWS morons and their attempted hostile takeover of Zucotti Park anyway. They had no legal “private property ownership” standing in the Park property before they started trying to squat there, and they still don’t. If a Court tries to hand them some such stake, I’d expect that either such a decision will be reversed on appeal, or some determination of a “taking” by some part of Gubmint takes place, along with a payment of compensation to the property owners of record, after some semblance of “due process”. That’s the way the law appears to read.
If Bloombutt and NYC want to let the #OWSies go back to drumming and squatting in Zucotti Park, in the end, they can probably do it. But, it’s going to take awhile, and it won’t be cheap for anybody involved.