DHS Says It Has 'Zero Tolerance' for Protesters' 'Verbal Assaults.' Here's What the Law Says.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Protests over poor living conditions for detainees at Delaney Hall immigration detention center erupted over the weekend, leading to the arrest of over 80 people, the Associated Press reported on Saturday. Some of the protesters arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents are accused of assaulting law enforcement officers, obstruction, and threats. But questions remain about whether the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) enforcement policies violate the First Amendment and chill speech on the ongoing public debate over immigration policies.

The crackdown on protesters is not surprising given Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin's statements during congressional hearings last week, in which he took a hard line against violent protesters. During a House Committee on Homeland Security hearing on June 3, Mullin testified that he is "OK with protest," so long as it is done "in a peaceful way, in a legal area." However, Mullin asserted, he has "zero tolerance" for individuals who "verbally assault our officers," "go after our vehicles," or "assault our property." "You assault one of our officers, we will find you. We will arrest you," he continued.

While Mullin is right that the destruction of government property and assaulting, resisting, or impeding law enforcement officers are both federal crimes, there is no such thing as "verbally assaulting" an officer under the law, Aaron Terr, the director of public advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), tells Reason.

Under the First Amendment, individuals are free "to criticize, mock, or disparage law enforcement officers" who "have no greater right than anyone else to be shielded from offense or criticism," Terr explains. "In fact, the Supreme Court has recognized that properly trained officers are expected to show even more restraint than the average citizen when confronted with provocative or challenging speech."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/dhs-says-zero-tolerance-protesters-153617551.html

[erronis]

1. Has Mullin listened to what the Jan6 rioters were yelling at the Capitol police?

I guess he'd say that that was Freedom of Speech for us, not for you.

[yankee87]

2. Fascism

This is how fascism gets its nose in the tent. Also, I have no problem with being part of good trouble.
We may or may not have a nation after the November elections and whether we have soldiers implementing martial law.

[oasis]

3. Verbal assaults a crime now?

Snowflake mofos!

[orleans]

4. what a bunch of SNOWFLAKES! (wah! they called me stupid ugly... boo fucking hoo) nt

[PurgedVoter]

5. When it was named "Homeland" we knew where this was going to end up

"Homeland" kind of screamed what their plans would be in the long run.

Keep in mind that they want us to think being against fascism is terrorism. (Antifa) And being aware of racial or gender issues and being tolerant to others is a precursor to terrorism. (Woke) I expect that in the short future, being against the use of fear and terror will also be called terrorism. Oh wait, that happened when people spoke out and called, "Shock and Awe" the same as fear and terror. A lot of us saw the book 1984 as a warning. The right wing is using it as a guideline.