First Amendment Challenge to DHS Actions at Los Angeles Protests

Press and legal observers say their rights have been infringed

In Los Angeles Press Club v. Noem (C.D. Cal.) a class of plaintiffs is seeking an injunction against Department of Homeland Security (DHS) actions class members allege interfere with their ability to report on what is happening at anti-ICE demonstrations in L.A. In a prior post, I discussed a different lawsuit by reporters who claim to have been injured at demonstrations when state and local law enforcement fired “less lethal” munitions at them. Los Angeles Press Club also involves claims by those seeking to gather information at the L.A. demonstrations. In this case, however, the defendants are federal law enforcement officials.

From the first paragraph of the Complaint:

Plaintiffs are reporters, legal observers and protesters, who seek injunctive relief to prevent Defendant Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) from using unnecessary and excessive violence to prevent them from exercising their First Amendment rights to report on, observe, and protest government actions. From Thomas Paine’s handing out pamphlets, to the Boston Tea Party, to the Women’s Suffrage Movement, to the Civil Rights Movement, to the Black Lives Matter movement, the cornerstone of this country’s public discourse for nearly 250 years has been the right to protest, to report on it, to challenge the government’s portrayal of events, and to publicly debate those issues. Without the right to engage in that discourse, the United States loses critical checks on government power that are essential to our constitutional democracy. Suppressing the rights of the free press and protesters is the calling card of cowardly dictators and threatens to destroy our nation.

Plaintiffs point to various actions DHS has taken, which they claim violate their First Amendment and other constitutional rights:

At each protest, DHS officers have unnecessarily and indiscriminately targeted, assaulted, tear-gassed, pepper-sprayed, and shot protesters exercising their right to assemble to voice their disagreement with the government, reporters covering these events, and legal observers seeking to document the government’s conduct. DHS is abusing militarized weapons in ways that needlessly imperil everyone present—and that federal courts have repeatedly prohibited—to deter people from reporting, observing, and protesting.

The Complaint contains several photographs of injuries to legal observers, reporters, and protesters who allege DHS used excessive force against them while they were engaged in lawful expressive activities.

As I indicated in the prior post, newsgathering and reporting on street demonstrations is vitally important to inform the public of both the actions of demonstrators and those of law enforcement. While rioting and unlawful assembly are not protected by the First Amendment, Plaintiffs claim they were not engaged in any unlawful acts when they were harmed.

The district court denied Plaintiffs’ motion for an emergency temporary restraining order, in part because it said the Complaint did not allege that the wrongful DHS actions were ongoing. Since DHS does not appear to be going anywhere and demonstrations against immigration raids and other types of enforcement will continue, Plaintiffs will have further opportunities to make their case.