A US federal appeals court on Friday upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of protest curfews imposed in New York City in 2020. The curfews were put in place in response to protests following the death of George Floyd. According to the court’s opinion, Lamel Jeffrey, Thaddeus Blake, and Chayse Pena were arrested and charged with violating these curfews and subsequently argued that their First Amendment right to free assembly and their Fourteenth Amendment protection against unlawful arrest were infringed.
Initially, in 2022, a federal district court dismissed their case, deeming the curfews a valid public safety regulation. The appellate panel, led by Circuit Judge Reena Raggi, upheld this decision, stating that the curfews were an appropriate response to documented violence, destruction, and looting within the city. The judge noted that traditional policing measures were first employed, followed by a curfew, which was ultimately deemed effective in restoring order.
This decision aligns with previous rulings—such as the 1941 Supreme Court decision in Cox v. New Hampshire—that have recognized the government’s ability to impose certain time, place, and manner restrictions under the First Amendment, provided that such measures do not affect the content or message of the protests. The appellate court’s ruling reaffirms the notion that public safety considerations can justify reasonable limitations on the right to assemble.
As a result, the arrests of Jeffrey, Blake, and Pena remain valid under New York law. Meanwhile, various legal challenges stemming from the George Floyd protests continue to make their way through the courts. Notably, a federal jury last year awarded protesters $14 million following their claim of excessive force by police in Denver, Colorado.
For further details, the full article can be read on JURIST.