Liberty Bell entrance a testing grounds for free speech rights

Defining freedom has turned out to be no simple thing at what might be considered the metaphysical ground zero of America.

The National Park Service, the American Civil Liberties Union, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, antiabortion demonstrators, and animal-rights activists have been crossing pens over who can do what in and around the narrow entrance to the Liberty Bell Pavilion.

About two million people a year visit Independence Hall and the Liberty Bell, according to official park statistics. About 100,000 are demonstrators.

At issue is what “First Amendment activity,” as the park service calls it, is allowed on the east side of Sixth Street between Chestnut and Market Streets. How many people? Can you use a bullhorn? Do you need a permit? Written? In advance?

That one block has long been a laboratory for the competing demands of public safety, free speech, and the right of assembly on a public sidewalk in the middle of a busy city.

“On a Saturday in July, it’s a mob scene out there” as tourists flood the street, said Jane Cowley, public affairs officer for Independence National Historical Park.

Different groups jostle for the same space. Unregulated demonstrations filling up the sidewalks are unworkable, Cowley said.

“You couldn’t walk by, so you can’t have someone standing with a sign. . . . People would end up walking out in the street, and that’s a safety hazard.”

The rules are in flux. The written regulation on the park’s Web site say there can be no “First Amendment activities” on the block. But that’s no longer the rule applied at the park.

And, of course, what’s reasonable to one person is unreasonable to another.

“I think the park service is still figuring out what to do,” said Marianne Bessey, campaign director for the Peace Advocacy Network, an animal-rights group that recently demonstrated against the horse-drawn tourist carriages.

“Last summer, they had regulations that prohibited free speech anywhere in the park except a small area,” Bessey said. The park service vehemently disputed that assertion.

The rules that govern most national parks – including in Philadelphia – say only specific areas can be off limits for demonstrators, and then for a limited number of reasons, including security and the need to accommodate ordinary tourists.

So in Washington you can demonstrate on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, but not inside, where you could prevent ordinary tourists from experiencing the monument.

Philadelphia does have a First Amendment Area, which Bessey was referring to, at Fifth and Market Streets.

Problem is, the masses are on Sixth Street, queuing up to see the Liberty Bell.

“It’s a very good place to do outreach,” Bessey said.

The ban on all “First Amendment activity” was in place until this past winter, when the ACLU went to federal court on behalf of the animal-rights activists. It argued that public speech must be allowed on public sidewalks unless there is a compelling reason otherwise.

The result was an agreement to allow demonstrators on the Sixth Street sidewalk provided they keep 20 feet from the entrance and 12 feet from an intersection and number no more than 20.

The written park service rules on the Internet that say “First Amendment activity” on that block is not allowed are being revised, Cowley said in response to a question last week.

But that will not be the end of controversies.

Another national park rule says every demonstrator – from one person to a million – must obtain a written permit two days in advance.

Until last month, the park service in Philadelphia had issued oral permits to groups who showed up unannounced.

But that ended after the Third Circuit last month heard the appeal of antiabortion demonstrator Michael Marcavage, arrested in 2007 after stationing himself outside the entrance on a busy fall weekend. Also on the block were other protesters displaying photos of aborted human fetuses.

Marcavage refused to move to another area and was arrested for not obeying the terms of his oral permit.

His attorney, C. Scott Shields, contends the park service removed his client because the graphic abortion posters were upsetting tourists. Lower courts dismissed his arguments.

But a Third Circuit judge noted that oral permits are not allowed by federal regulations. Now, Marcavage’s conviction could be thrown out, and rangers have stopped giving oral permits. A court decision could come by fall.

Even one or two people handing out leaflets are “technically” required to get a written permit, though Cowley said, “Our law enforcement rangers are cognizant that if one person shows up, it is unlikely to interfere with park services.”

Mary Catherine Roper, the ACLU lawyer, wants no permits for 20 or fewer people.

On a public sidewalk, “you don’t have to ask the government for permission to speak,” she said. “That’s one of the things you’re entitled to, unless there is a circumstance where there is a presumed need for government regulation.”

Richard W. Goldberg, the assistant U.S. attorney handling the Third Circuit appeal, suggested demonstrators might consider what they can do for their government.

Ten or 15 groups can show up on July Fourth, he said, “and everybody wants the best space.”

“Some of them can be very contentious . . . abortion, immigration, gay-pride events.”

“The more notice everybody would give us, the better we would be able to accommodate them. We want everyone to have their say.”

Copyright 2010 Philly Online, LLC.