The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • Times News Services
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out
  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
  • Opinion
  • Sports
    • NFL
    • NBA/WNBA
    • MLB
    • NHL
    • Tennis
    • Golf
    • Motorsports
    • Soccer
    • NCAA
    • Olympics
    • Outdoors
    • Other
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Fashion
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Military History
    • Life
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Themes
  • Communities
  • Marketplace
    • Autos
    • Jobs
    • Real Estate
    • Classifieds
    • Shopping
    • Dining Out
    • Education
    • TWT Store
  • Videos
    • Two Guys
    • Birnbaum on Washington
    • Liz Glover
    • Amanda Carpenter
    • Morning Briefing
    • Documentaries
    • Joe Giganti
    • Video Game Minute
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • Security

    Obama said to want revised Afghan options

  • Politics

    Bush warns of threats to freedom, economic growth

  • National

    Fort Hood shooting suspect charged with murder

  • Politics

    Obama has fences to mend on Japan trip

  • Business

    Obama calls for jobs forum in December

  • National

    HOLMES: Miscalculating engagement

  • National

    NORRIS: The Senate and the START treaty

Home » Opinion » Editorials

Monday, September 17, 2007

Targeting the First Amendment

Rate this story

Average 0.00
after 0 votes
Login or register to rate this story

  • Font Size -+
  • Print
  • Email
  • Comment
  • Tweet this!
  • Share
  • Article
  • Comments ()
  • Click-2-Listen
  • Videos

More Editorials Stories

  • EDITORIAL: Running away from terrorism
  • EDITORIAL: Exporting auto-bailout cash
  • EDITORIAL: Stimulus creates jobs in China
  • EDITORIAL: When the shooter becomes the victim

By

This is the second of two columns on President Bush's version of the First Amendment.

Nicole and Jeffrey Rank decided that on July 4, 2004, that they would tell the president directly, and peaceably, their views of a number of his policies. They were in the audience on that Independence Day when George W. Bush spoke in Charleston, W.Va. On the front of their T-shirts was the word, "Bush," crossed out. The back of Nicole's read, "Love America, Hate Bush;" and the back of Jeffrey's declared, "Regime Change Begins at Home."

White House advance-team staff members ordered the young couple to remove or cover their shirts or leave the event. Since they were on public property and were not being disruptive, the Ranks refused, pointing out that they were within their First Amendment rights of free speech. Then there was a disruption. The advance team instructed the local police to arrest the Ranks for trespassing and to forcibly remove them in handcuffs. They were jailed briefly, and criminal charges were filed against them.

"We couldn't believe what was happening to us," said American citizen Nicole Rank. "We tried to tell them we had a right to express our opinions in a peaceful way, but they wouldn't listen to us." They wouldn't listen because they were obeying the Presidential Advance Manual that details the ways in which protesters at presidential appearances must be "deterred" and, if possible, kept out of the sight of the president and the press.

I am able to tell you about the Presidential Advance Manual because the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of the Ranks and the First Amendment. In the course of this legal action, the White House's instructions were obtained on how to safeguard the president of the United States from peaceful protest even on the Fourth of July.

The president, I know, reads history, including American history, and I suggest he also read carefully the Presidential Advance Manual, from the Office of Presidential Advice, released in October 2002 and still in effect. I believe he will be embarrassed by it, and I hope he takes appropriate action.

Because of the ACLU lawsuit, appropriate action in accord with the Bill of Rights has been taken. Last month, the U.S. government settled the lawsuit, paying the Ranks $80,000 plus mediation costs, but admitting no wrongdoing. Criminal charges against them have been dismissed, and the temporary suspension of Nicole Rank from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, where she works, was lifted.

In this case (there are others pending around the country about the First Amendment's having been clubbed by the Presidential Advance Manual) the First Amendment is no longer imperiled in Charleston, W.Va.

There is a welcome addition to this partial redemption of the First Amendment, from which all our liberties flow, that merits further attention. On July 19, 2004, the City Council of Charleston (not a defendant in this case) unanimously passed a commendable, patriotic resolution apologizing to Jeff and Nicole Rank.

In what civics classes are left in the nation's public school system, I suggest this resolution be obtained and discussed. It begins: "Whereas, the founders of this nation declared that principles of law, enumerated in a Constitution and its Amendments, would govern them and those who followed, as opposed to the arbitrary will and rules of the King of England (as detailed in the Declaration of Independence)...

"That first Independence Day 228 years ago preserved the right of every citizen to express himself or herself peacefully (in a non-obscene manner)... regardless of whether that expression is popular, or unpopular... a view of the majority or the minority...

"Knowing what we know now, with the advantage of having information that was not available to the (Charleston) officers when they acted... Nicole and Jeff Rank should not have been arrested...

"If Nicole and Jeff Rank did nothing more than wear T-shirts which expressed their personal views and political opinions, and if that was the real reason that event officials (following the Presidential Advance Manual) directed our officers to arrest them, then Nicole and Jeff Rank deserve an apology... and the City does hereby apologize to Nicole and Jeff Rank." As of this writing, there has been no apology from President Bush.

Mr. President, there should be. As Samuel Adams, a principal igniter of the American Revolution, said, "Driven from every other corner of the earth, freedom of thought and the right of private judgment in matters of conscience direct their course to this happy country as their last asylum."

Post a comment

There are comments on this article, submit your opinion!

Please login or register to post a comment

Ask a Question

You Report

Do you have another point of view, photos, audio, video or more information about a story?

Top Stories

Most Read

  1. KELLNER: New Apple mouse really is 'Magic'
  2. EXCLUSIVE: Warner: Obama misplayed health care debate
  3. D.C. sniper executed in Virginia
  4. Airport rules changed after Ron Paul aide detained
  5. PRUDEN: Fatal reluctance to see evil
More Top Stories »
  1. Families meet as sniper's execution nears
  2. Michigan farm expert opens Marijuana U.
  3. EXCLUSIVE: Fort Hood suspect contacted Muslim extremists
  4. Houston sheriffs round up thousands of illegals
  5. Tax penalties and prison

Most Shared

  1. KELLNER: New Apple mouse really is 'Magic'
  2. Houston sheriffs round up thousands of illegals
  3. EXCLUSIVE: Fort Hood suspect contacted Muslim extremists
  4. Tax penalties and prison
  5. EDITORIAL: When the shooter becomes the victim
More Top Stories »
  1. Jordanian sees Jerusalem as a powder keg
  2. Obama's union drive stumbles in N.H.
  3. EDITORIAL: End Clinton-era military base gun ban
  4. Employers offer pet health care as perk
  5. E pluribus diversity?

Most Commented

  1. Houston sheriffs round up thousands of illegals
  2. EXCLUSIVE: Fort Hood suspect contacted Muslim extremists
  3. DeMint tries to ban 'permanent politicians'
  4. Obama: 'No faith justifies' Fort Hood attack
  5. Kennedy's disability plan could snag health bill
More Top Stories »
  1. D.C. sniper executed in Virginia
  2. Airport rules changed after Ron Paul aide detained
  3. EXCLUSIVE: GOPer Cao: Health vote may end career
  4. Dobbs leaves CNN before contract ends
  5. EDITORIAL: End Clinton-era military base gun ban

Listen to Washington Times Radio

  • America's Morning News

    with John McCaslin and Melanie Morgan

Question of the day

White House officials and Senate Democrats met in private three times last week to craft health care legislation. Do you think these discussions should be more public?

Blogs & Columns

  • POTUS Notes

    New Dem talking point on Obama approval doesn't wash

  • The Back Story

    12 arrested at Pelosi's office

  • Belief Blog

    New Vatican constitution released

  • Out of Context

    Foods that might kill libido

  • Technology

    Facebook wins round against phishing spammer

  • On the Fly

    United lifts some 'award' blocking

  • Redskins 360

    Nolan prefers chess to coaching

  • Tara's Two Cents

    On their way to summer vacation..

  • SNOBlog

    Beyond 'Woody'

Videos

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.