News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28. Parent comment

Re:Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since ... by pwinnski on Tuesday June 02, 2020 @03:17PM (#23395014)
The first amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America supersedes local ordnances, and journalists absolutely do no have to disperse when police issues such an order to the general public.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since ... by lostmsu on Tuesday June 02, 2020 @03:59PM (#23395650)
> journalists absolutely do no have to disperse when police issues such an order to the general public

The first amendment speaks nothing about who can be where. It just denies government the right to prosecute people for making statements.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since ... by evan_ on Tuesday June 02, 2020 @04:34PM (#23395985)
> The first amendment speaks nothing about who can be where. It just denies government the right to prosecute people for making statements.

"just" free speech? Might want to check your pocket constitution again. The first amendment also protects the free press- and the freedom to assemble. (Not to mention religion and to petition for redress of grievances)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since ... by lostmsu on Tuesday June 02, 2020 @05:55PM (#23396828)
Admittedly, I have no pocket constitution, but brisk search only talks about peaceful assembly, which riots are not.

Besides, you completely ignore the "who can be where" point.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since ... by chasd00 on Tuesday June 02, 2020 @05:18PM (#23396432)
geez 3 weeks ago all those freedoms were widely thrown out the window yet now they are unassailable??

/done with HN for today

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since ... by chasd00 on Tuesday June 02, 2020 @05:16PM (#23396416)
i find that very hard to believe. Crowds are ordered to disperse when things are getting dangerous or a curfew put in place by an elected official has passed. I don't see any plausible reason why dispersal wouldn't apply to the whole crowd and only a subset.
[ Parent | on HN ]