To receive daily emails from Breaking Christian News to your inbox CLICK HERE


SHARE THIS ARTICLE Printer friendly version of this page

Justice Department Insists the Government Can Dictate Where People Can Engage in Religious Activity

Nisha Whitehead : Sep 5, 2016  Rutherford Institute

"Unfortunately, free speech zones, bubble zones, trespass zones, anti-bullying legislation, zero tolerance policies, hate crime laws, overly vague noise ordinances, and a host of other legalistic maladies dreamed up by politicians and prosecutors have conspired to corrode our core freedoms." — John W. Whitehead

(Washington, DC) — [Rutherford Institute] Insisting that the government can dictate where people can engage in religious activity, the Department of Justice is asking a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit, Payden-Travers v. Talkin, filed by attorneys for The Rutherford Institute challenging a 2013 regulation which broadly prohibits expressive activity in the plaza fronting the U.S. Supreme Court's building. The regulation was issued in response to a June 2013 ruling in another lawsuit, Hodge v. Talkin, filed by Rutherford Institute attorneys in which a federal district court declared a 60-year-old statute banning expressive activities on the Supreme Court plaza "unreasonable, substantially overbroad, and irreconcilable with the First Amendment." (Photo Credit: Flickr.com)

In May 2016, the Supreme Court upheld its own ban on expressive activity in Hodge. Payden-Travers v. Talkin takes up where Hodge left off, challenging the Court's broader prohibitions on expressive activity, especially as they relate to religious expression. Rutherford Institute attorneys argue the plaza prohibition violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which says the government must have a compelling interest in order to intrude on someone's religious liberty, and it must do so in the least restrictive way.

The Rutherford Institute's complaint in Payden-Travers v. Talkin and the Dept. of Justice's motion to dismiss are available at www.rutherford.org. Affiliate attorney Jeffrey Light is assisting The Rutherford Institute in its challenge to the Supreme Court's prohibitions of expressive activity on its plaza.

"There are a good many things that are repugnant to the Constitution right now—mass surveillance of Americans, roadside strip searches, forcible DNA extractions, SWAT team raids, civil commitments for criticizing the government, etc.—but for the U.S. Supreme Court to overtly prohibit expressive activity on its grounds shows exactly how perverse our so-called system of justice has become," said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People. "Unfortunately, free speech zones, bubble zones, trespass zones, anti-bullying legislation, zero tolerance policies, hate crime laws, overly vague noise ordinances, and a host of other legalistic maladies dreamed up by politicians and prosecutors have conspired to corrode our core freedoms." (Photo Credit: Wikipedia.org)

The plaza area in front of the Supreme Court is oval in shape and approximately 252 feet in length, is open 24-hours a day and is no different than other traditional public fora such as parks and sidewalks. The plaza has historically been used for First Amendment activities, including press conferences, tourists conversations, and filming of scenes for movies. Nevertheless, a 60-year-old statute broadly made it unlawful to display any flag, banner, or device designed to bring into public notice a party, organization, or movement while on the grounds of the U.S. Supreme Court, thereby banning expressive activity on the Supreme Court plaza. In January 2012, The Rutherford Institute filed a lawsuit, Hodge v. Talkin, on behalf of a political activist who was charged with violating the statute by silently standing on the plaza with a sign protesting police brutality. In June 2013, U.S. District Court Judge Beryl L. Howell ruled that the statute was unconstitutionally overbroad, facially unconstitutional and void. Just two days after this ruling, the Supreme Court adopted Regulation 7, which attempts to reinstate the restrictions struck down by Judge Howell by banning any "demonstration" on the Supreme Court grounds, which is broadly defined by Regulation 7 to include all forms of conduct communicating views or grievances that might draw onlookers.

Rutherford Institute







SHARE THIS ARTICLE Printer friendly version of this page

To receive daily emails from Breaking Christian News to your inbox CLICK HERE

Other Recent Articles from Breaking Christian News

Good News: TPUSA High School Clubs More Than Double, Hit 2,700 Nationwide

Atheist Bill Maher Condemns Media Silence on Christian Genocide in Nigeria: 'Systematic Killing'

'We Found Him': The Alleged Smoke Bomber Who Disrupted a Sean Feucht Worship Event; His Shocking Links to Antifa Inside Canada's Military

As Deadly Violence against Houses of Worship Rises, So Do Law Enforcement, Security Measures

Portland Police Arrest Conservative Journalist Nick Sortor Outside ICE Facility, 'But None of the Domestic Terrorists'

Apple Takes Down ICE Tracking Apps After Pressure from Bondi DOJ

Kash Patel's FBI Cuts All Ties to Southern Poverty Law Center

The President Is Already Using the Shutdown to Slash Federal Spending, Plans to Make Job Cuts

Israeli Leaders React to Terror Attack on UK Synagogue as Navy Intercepts Pro-Hamas Flotilla

President Trump Sets Sunday Deadline for Hamas to Accept Deal or Face 'ALL HELL'

'Blown Away': Hundreds Saved and Baptized as 8,000 Students Seek Jesus at University of Tennessee

Concerned Citizens Checked Their 'Conservative' Town High School Library for These Obscene Books Available to Students; Here's What Happened

DOJ Investigates Major School District Over DEI Programs

RFK Jr. Directs FDA to Study the Safety of Abortion Pills

Planned Parenthood Closes Houston Abortion Facility That Was Biggest in America

Democrat Prosecutor Sued after Dropping Charges against Woman Who Violently Assaulted Pro-Lifer

Kilmar Abrego Garcia's Final Order of Removal Stands as Judge Denies Motion to Reopen His Case

Gov't Shutdown Continues: White House Releases New Memo Exposing Dems' Demand for Nearly $200 B in Taxpayer-Funded Healthcare for Illegal Immigrants

Watch: Faith Revival Follows Charlie Kirk's Death As More People Attend Church and Read the Bible; 'This Is Bigger Than Charlie Kirk'

Israel's PM Just Blew Up All Those Conspiracy Theories About Charlie Kirk Being Anti-Semitic



Search the Articles Archives

Keyword:  
Author:  
Words Posted On:  
Day Month Year



BCN Plus

Follow BCN on Twitter
Are You Praying for Our Government Leaders?
BCN Staff

Steve Shultz
Steve Shultz, Managing Editor
Founder and Owner


Aimee Herd
Aimee Herd, Editor


BCN Plus
Are You Praying for President Trump?
 
 

All articles on this site and emails from BCN are copyrighted property of Breaking Christian News. Permission is given to link to, or share a BCN story if proper attribution is given to both the original writer and summarizer of the story. Breaking Christian News 2005-2019. All Rights Reserved.


Breaking Christian News is a division of Elijah List Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved


Disclaimer: Articles and links, as well as the source articles linked to; do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Breaking Christian News.

editor@breakingchristiannews.com