Demonstrations and protests are forms of skirmishes that are led by a group of people for a particular cause or in order to achieve a specific result. It may involve the group of people marching or gathering at a designated venue to hold rallies and voice their concerns.
Protests by the militia turn out to usually involve some form of violent actions and this necessitates the involvement of the police to safeguard the public as well as public property. Such demonstrations could well turn out to be commencement of warfare if not well handled.
As such, the department of the Police Force tasked with managing and controlling such crowds is essentially the anti-riot police. The encounters the police have with the demonstrators should however be within the law because constitutionally, it is the right of the aggrieved parties to voice their views as long as their actions remain within the acceptable limits of the law (American Library Association, 2013).
Under the Fourth Amendment, the law clearly states that, “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized,” (Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute, 2013).
Under the First Amendment, “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” (Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute, 2013).
Arresting an individual refers to employing officially permissible power to take away their rights in regard to moving about as well as their free will to do the same. The law in the United States requires that prior to arresting someone, that person must be given the Miranda warning which is a means of clarifying the individual’s rights.
This provides an advantage for the suspects in that they cannot unintentionally incriminate themselves. The Miranda warning states that the individual should be made knowledgeable of the right to remain silent, the right to seek advice from a legal representative and have the legal representative in attendance throughout the duration of questioning, and the right to have a lawyer prearranged if one cannot afford to have one.
Without this legal process, any accusations leveled against the accused are dismissible in a court of law. Title 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 protects protestors in that whoever denies them their constitutional rights shall be answerable in the courts of law, unless a ruling was dishonored (Forsythe, 2013).
The current case law on protests is such that the legislation permits those charged with arraigning cases related to protests and demonstrations to indict any person who gains access to any structure devoid of authorization or with the objective to cause disorder to a gathering that is congregating in the name of the government, with a national misdemeanor.
This is especially the case if the Secret Service is present on the location. However, the ruling does not only limit this scenario to the presidential residential settings but also to any other construction or premise which the president takes a trip to even if it is just for a short period of time, as long as it has an implication on national matters.
Also included in this list are all other individuals under the protection of the Secret Service. This clearly means that it becomes a felony to interrupt any function attended by such personalities.
When we put into consideration that searches and seizures which are the two main ways by which the police and other law enforcement agencies gather evidence of a crime, it may be important to note that the law requires that any investigation of an individual, property as well as incarceration of crime scene substantiation must be reasonable.
One prerequisite which cannot be ignored is that of a search warrant from a judge. This entails details of the location, individuals concerned and what they may decide to confiscate; though if there is a crisis, they may be overlooked.
Also required is that in responding to a planned demonstration, the police force may employ extra law enforcement protection to deter violence during events expected to excite the interests of the public, and they may institute reasonable time, place and manner restrictions on all groups wishing to protest (Find Law, 2013).
Nonetheless, people cannot be deprived of their constitutional right to demonstrate on publicly in whatever form be it through marching, debates or rallies. All this is on condition that any assemblage must acquire authorization in form of a permit that specifies the time, venue and mode in which their activities will take place to guarantee the security and order of the public (Forsythe, 2013).
Reference List
American Library Association. (2013). First Amendment of the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution. Web.
Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute. (2013). First Amendment. Web.
Find Law. (2013). Search and Seizure. Web.
Forsythe. (2013). A guide to civil rights liability under 42 u.s.c. § 1983: An overview of supreme court and eleventh circuit precedent. Web.