3 ms·
In the U.S., however, First Amendment protection for flipping the bird is not considered "clearly established" law in some portions of the country, and police o
by jawns 4y ago
In the U.S., however, First Amendment protection for flipping the bird is not considered "clearly established" law in some portions of the country, and police officers can be protected by qualified immunity if they arrest you in retaliation for displaying the middle finger.
The U.S. Courts of Appeal for the 2nd Circuit and 6th Circuit have held that flipping the bird is protected speech. (See Swartz v. Insogna, 2013, and Ellis v. Davidson, 2004.)
But as far as I've been able to determine, the 3rd Circuit, which governs my own part of the country, has not made any definitive rulings on it.
That means that a case like Guessford v. Douglas et al, which was recently filed by a Delaware man, might end up with the police involved protected from punishment.
(Guessford held up a handmade "RADAR AHEAD" sign while standing near a speed trap, and the police ripped up the sign, then later pulled him over and cited him in retaliation for flipping them the bird.)
- Dalewyn 4y ago>(Guessford held up a handmade "RADAR AHEAD" sign while standing near a speed trap, and the police ripped up the sign, then later pulled him over and cited him in retaliation for flipping them the bird.) The police can have fun fighting the likes of Google and Apple, since their map programs feature speed trap warnings.
- jakeogh 4y agoAny SC that would rule against that hand signal as anything but speech would be clearly making new law. There are strong forces that would like to do this, but at the moment the SC majority+ is not. Sign language is language. To the other side... it may be worth attempting to rewrite the sign dictionary such that dissent is assult. Billions of $ already are spent on it monthly. It's a long road to the SC. I think that is a feature. Fire*3 might need another look https://youtu.be/4Z2uzEM0ugY https://youtu.be/4Z2uzEM0ugY