The Use of Force and the First Amendment
University of Florida student Andrew Meyer certainly has opened a legal can of worms. Whether or not he meant to is up for debate, but the bigger debate right now is about whether or not the use of force by police against him was excessive and if his right to free speech was violated.
Meyer is the student who was Tasered by University Police Department officers after they restrained him while he was asking a lengthy question at a political event where Senator John Kerry was speaking. The incident was filmed from various angles and the video clips have been all over the Internet and television news shows since the September 17th incident.
The much publicized arrest and Tasering of Meyer has sparked heated debate around the country over the use of excessive force and Taser gun units by police and First Amendment rights.
Did the police go too far in restraining, Tasering and arresting Meyer because he refused to give up the microphone when it was his turn to ask Senator Kerry a few questions? The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Florida says that they most certainly did.
Howard Simon, ACLU of Florida executive director, said "People have a reasonable expectation to ask questions in a public setting - even if they are aggressive and some disagree with their position - that is free speech plain and simple."
So now, of course, the hot question is whether or not, should he choose to file a personal injury lawsuit, Meyer would be able to prove in court that his First Amendment rights were violated by the five police officers who stopped him from continuing to speak at the political event.
The pivotal question is: Exactly why did police arrest and remove Meyer from the event?
Did they feel that he was being so overly aggressive and combative towards Kerry that he was causing a disruption or danger at the event, or were they simply offended by the tone of the questions and remarks he was making while was at the microphone?
Some legal experts say that Meyer would have a difficult time proving that the University Police Department officers violated his constitutional rights. Unless there is proof that the officers acted because of the content of Meyers speech, and not his conduct, a lawsuit would be pretty flimsy.
Tom Poulton, a lawyer in Winter Park, Florida handles cases in which law enforcement officers are accused of making false arrests or using excessive police force. It is his opinion that if Meyer were to sue, the police would not have to prove that they took the best possible course of action, only that they acted reasonably in the situation. Considering the applause of the audience as police were removing Meyer, you might be inclined to think that the police did act within reason.
Tom Julin, a Miami lawyer who specializes in First Amendment practice, agrees with Poulton that to successfully sue the police department, Meyer would have to prove that his behavior was not the reason for the police action against him and that they reacted because they disagreed with what he was saying.
Julin said, "He would have to show ... that he was not being disruptive, that he was not in violation of any content-neutral rules, that he was following all the rules and that he was not violating anyone else's rights."
That seems like a lot of proof for Meyer to come up with.
Julin also said that the rules regarding the event did not infringe on the First Amendment rights of any of the people who attended. He says that taking action against someone who violated the rules of the event would not be considered censorship and that the use of police force to maintain order could actually be considered protection of the First Amendment rights of other attendees.
The use of the Taser gun by the police really brought this incident into the spotlight. We might never have even heard of Andrew Meyer if there had not been a video camera and a Taser gun in the story.
Regardless of any legal opinion, we will likely be hearing a lot more of Meyer before this news story fades to black. He somehow just doesn't seem to be the kind of guy who will go away quietly.