Skip to main content

Deeply conservative City of Colorado Springs has verbally agreed this evening to provide an permit to Occupy Colorado Springs Movement stated Jason Warf, the groups chief public spokesman at Occupy Colorado Springs 7 PM General Assembly. He told me that the formal process of negotiating a few more details and receiving the permit will take 24 to 48 hours. The final hurdle is that the newly elected Mayor, Stephen G. (Steve) Bach.

The permit would allow Occupy Colorado Springs to keep up their (3) three canopy shelters, providing information, communication and food & beverages for the volunteers manning the occupy site 24/7 now going on nineteen consecutive days. The group has requested two more shelters. The shelters are adjacent to Acacia Park, on the public right-a-way between the wide walk and the street accommodating ten x ten feet without blocking or inhibiting any sidewalks. Acacia Park closes at 11 PM each night where no Occupy participants enter after curfew but maintain a protest presence at or near the corner of the intersection of Bijou and Tejon Streets in downtown Colorado Springs.

The group has remained steadfastly peaceful owing to no arrests and complying with the city's NO CAMPING ORDINANCE after being warned for three pop up or dome tents also on the public right-a-way. Currently the group has 1515 friends on its Facebook Community Page and 165 persons who have stated they will be active at the protest site.  

The permit will allow the group's First Amendment Rights to be exercised:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Originally, the First Amendment was applied only to laws enacted by the Congress. restricted to Congress starting with Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925), the Supreme Court has expanded the amendment's interpretation to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment , thereby applying the First Amendment to each state, including any local government.

The key term is abridging meaning: (from Merriam Webster)

1. a: deprive b: to reduce in scope c: Diminish (attempts to ~ the right of free speech)

Legal Definition:

(Divest), verb attach, deprive of, dispossess of, disseise, divest of, expropriate, limit, restrict, seize, strip, take away, usurp, wrest from
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (16+ / 0-)

    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty~Ben Franklin

    by RWN on Tue Oct 18, 2011 at 08:14:55 PM PDT

  •  Wow, is there a Crazianity Convention in (0+ / 0-)

    another state?

    •  no the reason is a series of ACLU consent decrees (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Little, antirove, bronte17, OLinda

      Over free speech and assembly from earlier protests has made the city far more flexible when it comes to the agitation of free political speech.

      And further the idea of working deftly with the city which has lost hundreds of thousands of dollars from legal fees defending stupidity, that allowing a few canopy shelters that have been up for 19 days continue under an agreement and since there has been no arrests, violence, or drama outside a honk and a drum beat.

      They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty~Ben Franklin

      by RWN on Tue Oct 18, 2011 at 08:37:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The purpose of the speech or assembly (0+ / 0-)

        should not be determinative.  Natural rights, derived from our capacities and functions as humans should not be abridged without a warrant.  The reason some are specifically enumerated is because some are more likely than others to be abridged. It did not occur to the founders that people walking would be considered a nuisance by the agents of government. That property rights should trump human rights probably didn't occur to them either, although they effectively set it up that way by making slavery legal.

        People to Wall Street: "LET OUR MONEY GO"

        by hannah on Tue Oct 18, 2011 at 11:15:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Big respect for the OCS folks (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bronte17, jan4insight, OLinda

    This is brave stuff for Colorado Springs, a conservative nightmare of a city. Good for you. Keep strong and be safe.

    Score Card: Marriages won by me, 1. Marriages destroyed by me, 0.

    by Steven Payne on Tue Oct 18, 2011 at 09:23:37 PM PDT

  •  According to Justice Anthony Kennedy (0+ / 0-)

    the "issuance of a permit is not a matter of grace." That's because the underlying behavior for which a permit is required is presumed to be good and the permit is a sort of notification to the agents of government that the activity is contemplated and what they may need to do to help.
    Individuals aren't just presumed innocent of crime. Their behaviors, especially the exercise of their rights, are presumed good.  Individuals are not to be deprived of rights, except as a punishment for crime.  And, of course, the punishment is supposed to come after the crime, not before.
    While the issue of prior restraint has been litigated in regards to the press (in the case of the NYTimes publication of the Pentagon Papers), the rights of persons (to assemble, to congregate, to perambulate, to recreate, to petition, to speak, to sit, to carry out their natural functions) without prior restraint has not been challenged, as far as I know.
    What our agents of government are obligated to protect and respect is the Constitution.  The agents of government are not tasked with protecting people, much less an amorphous nation, by arbitrarily and capriciously restricting the natural rights of any person. Yes, they can claim to have reason, but prior restraint is not justified unless there's a clear and present danger.

    So, don't feel any gratitude. Colorado Springs has an obligation to permit the public use of public space.  If they can't prove a danger, the permit has to be issued. Building permits, by the way, address known physical hazards.  Temporary structures are not permitted because, in the event of a weather event that might make them airborne, they can be easily moved to a safe location within a permanent structure. Even permanent structures that have been built to code sometimes collapse, but if building specifications have been followed, they likely won't.  We have good evidence of that from the fact that when hurricane Andrew hit south Florida the only houses left standing were those built by Habitat for Humanity to code specifications.

    Also according to Justice Kennedy, the people are to enforce the law.  How are they to do that if not by calling a halt to violations of the Constitution via the unwarranted deprivation of rights?

    People to Wall Street: "LET OUR MONEY GO"

    by hannah on Tue Oct 18, 2011 at 11:09:22 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site