Occupy Cincinnati Protestors have filed suit against city and police officials for violating their first amendment rights. The source of the suit is the refusal of the city to issue 24-hr permits to protestors in Cincinnati’s Piatt Park, which has resulted in over $20,000 worth of citations against protestors violating the 10pm park curfew.
The outcome of the suit may very well re-shape the occupy movement’s national strategy.
Unlike most occupy camp sites, Cincinnati’s Piatt Park is city-owned. In New York, Zuccotti Park, the epicenter of the Occupy movement, is privately owned by Brookfield Properties. Here in Pittsburgh, Mellon Green is, not surprisingly, owned by BNY Mellon. Though open to the public, these parks are private property, and, so far, the protestors remain there at the largesse of the parks’ respective owners.
Protest organizers worry that park’s owners could revoke their permission to stay at any time. Any resulting legal battle would, most likely, not go in their favor. That is certainly true here in Pennsylvania, where property laws tend to favor owners. Most importantly, the first amendment’s state action requirement means that such claims could not be advanced against private entities. Even if the legal claims of the protestors were successful, it could result in a temporary eviction, or to clashes with law enforcement, both of which protestors are dead set on avoiding.
If Occupy Cincinnati is successful in their claim, it may inspire other protestors to de-camp to city owned land. Alternatively, it could severely undermine confidence in the movement’s staying power. Either way, it looks like protestors may have a new home, albeit temporary, at Occupy Courthouse.
Res Ipsa Blogger 