D.C. Embassy Protest Sign Ban Killed : But Police May Break Up Demonstrations, Supreme Court Says

The Supreme Court, ruling on the rights of political protest, today struck down the District of Columbia’s ban on the carrying of protest signs within 500 feet of a foreign embassy.

In a 5-3 vote that overturned an appeals court ruling by Judge Robert H. Bork, the court declared that the capital’s prohibition against such signs holding governments up to “public odium” is “inconsistent with the First Amendment” protection of freedom of speech.

However, the court upheld another section of the District of Columbia’s anti-demonstration law that bars groups of demonstrators from congregating outside embassies and gives police broad authority to disperse protesters and make arrests.

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, writing for the court, said police in the nation’s capital may disperse groups congregating near embassies when they “reasonably believe that a threat to the security or peace of the embassy is present.”

Would Permit Picketing

Banning such gatherings “does not prohibit peaceful congregations,” O’Connor said. The ban “is limited to groups posing a security threat.”

O’Connor rejected arguments that such a ban gives police too much discretion to break up demonstrations.

She said the test for deciding whether a demonstration is illegal “is whether normal embassy activities have been or are about to be disrupted.”

But today’s decision would permit picketing by individuals near embassies.

Blanket Ban Too Broad

O’Connor said banning all such sign-carrying violates the Constitution’s free-speech guarantees. A blanket ban on signs that might be offensive to foreign diplomats is too broad, she said.

“It may serve an interest in protecting the dignity of foreign missions, but it is not narrowly tailored,” she said. “A less restrictive alternative is readily available.”

For example, she said, it would be constitutional to ban picketing that is designed to intimidate, coerce, threaten or harass a foreign official.

Today’s ruling partially overturned a 1986 decision by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals here upholding all aspects of the District of Columbia’s ban on protests near embassies. That ruling was written by the conservative Bork, whom the Senate rejected for a Supreme Court seat last year.

Need for Protection

The appeals court said free-speech interests of the demonstrators were outweighed by the need to protect foreign emissaries.

The 500-foot restrictions were challenged by Michael Boos, J. Michael Waller and Bridget Brooker, members of the Young Conservative Alliance of America.

Joining O’Connor in both phases of today’s ruling were Justices William J. Brennan, Thurgood Marshall, John Paul Stevens and Antonin Scalia.

The three members of the court who dissented from the majority and voted to uphold the ban on signs were Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Byron R. White and Harry A. Blackmun.