Connect with us

Of Ordinance, Order and Occupation

Published

on

San Francisco District 8, Castro Supervisor, Scott Wiener has released an ugly blueprint: an ordinance in search of a problem that threatens to turn the Castro into a First-Amendment-free zone.

Sometimes it can be small, local issues or ordinances that can impact the narrative – if not set it – in a broader state, national or international context.

The Occupy Wall Street (OWS) protests that began in Zuccotti Park, and spread like wildfire across the country, and then internationally, demonstrated this perfectly.

Rumors of a coordinated effort among 18 mayors and the Department of Homeland Security were unintentionally confirmed by Oakland mayor, Jean Quan, in an interview with the BBC (excerpted on The Takeaway radio program–audio of Quan starts at the 5:30 mark), just before a wave of violent raids against OWS encampments across the country. The success of the Occupy movement represents a threat. A national threat, apparently, to be countered locally.

San Francisco has been a hotbed of protest and politics, and anyone who knows anything about San Francisco history is aware of the relationship between gay rights and the iconic Castro district. From Harvey Milk’s historic campaign for Supervisor, his election and tragic assassination in 1978 to the riots following Dan White’s puny sentence for the assassination, as well as the powerful mobilization of Act Up, the Castro has shone as an international model for its thriving community and the political power it has wielded in the interest of its primarily gay residents.

From fiery political speeches, candlelight vigils, victories and defeats, the Castro has brought the community together in sickness and in health. A place where women in suits mingle with Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence. Where politicians know to embrace diversity as an election imperative. Not because of national gay organizations setting up shop to drain money better served filling local coffers. Nor because of  its stores selling over-priced rainbow colored crap using protectionist trade practices under the guise of  history, more concerned with what you buy for the Matthew Shepherd memorials than the tears you cry.

The powerful draw of the Occupy movement and the global condemnation of the often heavy-handed, violent response have local governments across the country scrambling for solutions. The First Amendment is under attack with unprecedented firepower, as the protections it affords its citizens to assemble and protest, and the press to observe and report, is being trampled on with jackboots, pepper-spray, rubber bullets and tear gas.

Against this backdrop, San Francisco District 8, Castro Supervisor, Scott Wiener, perhaps the most insipid and uninspiring in the colorful seat’s history, is proposing an ordinance that would have Mike Bloomberg wet-dreaming, were he to get his hands on it. Wiener’s biggest claim to fame, to date, has been to save San Francisco from nudists without towels to place between their butts and public seating. Seriously.

His latest attempt, however, is a lot more alarming. A stupefying, muddled, impossible to follow or enforce, unconstitutionally vague piece of garbage that hands over any control over, or responsibility for the district he was elected to serve, and gives it to to the Director of the Department of Public Works .

In a rare instance, the controversial rainbow flag in Harvey Mile Plaza is lowered to half mast to remember Mark Bingham on September 11, 2011.

A local fight over control of the giant rainbow flag that flies over the Castro, located in Harvey Milk Plaza, has been simmering for ten months between activists and the politically powerful Merchants of Upper Market and Castro (MUMC), over an alleged “agreement” with the city’s Department of Public Works (DPW), unable to be produced by either party in spite of he city’s powerful Sunshine laws. A meeting between activists and DPW scheduled for October 26, 2011 at City Hall was abruptly cancelled at Wiener’s behest. What seems local and petty on the surface offers a sobering view of what happens when representation of corporate interests trumps the desire of citizens to express themselves legally.

Wiener’s behavior, and bizarre release of an ordinance in search of a problem has done little other than actually precipitate an Occupy Castro demonstration. His interference that resulted in the termination of a meeting between activists and DPW is blatantly personal, and likely in retaliation for a September 11th anniversary event honoring Flight 93 hero Mark Bingham in the very plaza he seeks to regulate into obliteration.

Despite resistance by MUMC to any efforts to lower the flag, and despite Wiener ignoring repeated requests by activists to get involved in brokering the dispute, he had no qualms making political hay once the successfully organized commemoration was in full swing. But the microphone was intercepted by Michael Petrelis, an organizer of the event, before Wiener reached it. Excoriating him for his hypocrisy and lack of leadership, in front of media hordes, San Francisco mayor, Ed Lee, and other San Francisco power brokers, Wiener’s subsequent speech was an excruciating, cringe-inducing embarrassment.

What could have served for a model for all jurisdictions in San Francisco, and what the city needs, is an ordinance designed to advance and protect freedom of expression and clarify to activists, celebrants, the general public, and anyone seeking to enjoy their rights to free expression, or to peaceably assemble how to best do so. And instructions for law enforcement that balance public safety with free speech. That, however, would have required leadership.

Wiener’s proposed ordinance is an ugly blueprint. Attacks on the homeless and the city’s most vulnerable citizens, along with lack of affordable housing and healthcare require more community involvement than ever. It threatens to choke the Castro’s creativity, silence the rich and diverse voices, and turn the vibrant nightlife into a petty, curfew controlled, First-Amendment-free zone. And of course, where Occupations can be killed before they even begin.

This is what a sanitized, consumerist Dinseyfication looks like. Anyone who respects the Castro’s rich political history should decry this ordinance, and get Scott Wiener the hell out office before he actually inflicts some serious damage. San Francisco Supervisors are often derided for their silliness, not always without good reason, but the office of the Supervisor is not a playground for local merchant group hacks or gangly, amateur-hour politicians with bruised egos exacting revenge or treating the First Amendment as a political toy to advance their unpromising careers.

The biggest question is whether Wieners proposed ordinance is a purposeful, cunning, barely disguised First Amendment attack aimed to arm San Francisco in advance or a stunningly ignorant and misguided attempt to score political points without realizing the dangerous precedent it can inflict with the stroke of a pen.

The national conversation that began with OWS continues, but it’s on a local level where many of the battles will be fought and victories won.

Disclosure
I am one of the activists who believe that control over the flagpole by MUMC, regardless of an agreement or lack thereof with DPW, threatens the First Amendment rights of activists for whom commemoration and acts of solidarity along with the resulting education and action, are more important the consumerist arguments made by MUMC. I support MUMC having some role as well, but not one that lacks consensus, consistent application and transparency. I was also supposed to attend the meeting on October 26, 2011 with Amy L. Brown, Acting City Administrator for the City and County of San Francisco, which was abruptly cancelled by her assistant with no explanation. 

 

Clinton Fein is an internationally acclaimed author, artist, and First Amendment activist, best-​known for his 1997 First Amendment Supreme Court victory against United States Attorney General Janet Reno. Fein has also gained international recognition for his Annoy​.com site, and for his work as a political artist. Fein is on the Board of Directors of the First Amendment Project, “a nonprofit advocacy organization dedicated to protecting and promoting freedom of information, expression, and petition.” Fein’s political and privacy activism have been widely covered around the world. His work also led him to be nominated for a 2001 PEN/Newman’s Own First Amendment Award.

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Lame Duck’ Trump Loses Major Battle in Indiana: ‘Not Even Close to Being Close’

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s efforts to compel Indiana lawmakers to enact a mid-decade congressional map that could have wiped out all of the Hoosier State’s Democratic seats in the U.S. House of Representatives has failed.

“Republicans hold a 40-10 advantage in the state Senate but still rejected Trump’s pressure,” The Washington Post reported. HuffPost called it a “a furious pressure campaign by Trump.”

“Indiana’s proposed congressional map goes down in flames in the state Senate, 31-19,” Votebeat managing editor Nathaniel Rakich observed. 26 votes were needed for the new maps to have been adopted.

Politico reported that the “failed vote is the culmination of a brass-knuckled four-month pressure campaign from the White House on recalcitrant Indiana Republicans that included private meetings and public shaming from Trump, multiple visits from Vice President JD Vance, whip calls from Speaker Mike Johnson and veiled threats of withheld federal funds.

RELATED: ‘Shakedown’: Outrage Over Claim of Trump Plan to Defund Indiana in Map Clash

“Not even close to being close,” noted Bloomberg Government’s Jonathan Tamari. “I certainly did not predict the Indiana state Senate as a hotbed of Trump resistance.”

“Trump’s such a lame duck that he is getting his a– kicked by the Indiana State Senate,” remarked former Obama senior advisor Dan Pfeiffer.

Journalist Todd Zwillich called it a “Wholesale rejection” of a “threat” from the conservative Heritage Action.

Aaron Fritschner, deputy chief of staff for U.S. Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA), noted that Trump “didn’t just lose that vote, he got blown out.”

Lesson for national Republicans,” wrote Jessica Riedel of the Brookings Institution. “You don’t have to sell out every principle and publicly worship Trump. Really, you can just do things. And you should ask why it took some state legislators in Indiana to finally stand up for common sense governance.”

You do, unironically and in earnest, have to hand it to the Indiana GOP for not giving in to the threats on their lives etc.,” declared Everytown Senior Director of Communications Max Steele. “Trump is a duck getting lamer by the day. Hopefully this emboldens others to do what’s right.”

READ MORE: ‘Where Is Antifa Headquartered?’: FBI Official Struggles Defending Top Threat Label

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Shakedown’: Outrage Over Claim of Trump Plan to Defund Indiana in Map Clash

Published

on

Heritage Action and President Donald Trump are coming under fire after the conservative advocacy organization made a claim that the president threatened to defund the state of Indiana should lawmakers not pass legislation to redraw its congressional district maps.

“President Trump has made it clear to Indiana leaders: if the Indiana Senate fails to pass the map, all federal funding will be stripped from the state,” Heritage Action wrote on social media on Thursday. “Roads will not be paved. Guard bases will close. Major projects will stop. These are the stakes and every NO vote will be to blame.”

The post ended with, “#PassTheMap.”

While President Trump has publicly threatened to support primary challengers against lawmakers who oppose his redistricting push, NCRM has not found any news reports confirming Heritage Action’s assertion. It is possible the group is relying on information that has not been reported or made public.

READ MORE: ‘Where Is Antifa Headquartered?’: FBI Official Struggles Defending Top Threat Label

Should Indiana pass legislation to redistrict, it reportedly could pick up only two more GOP-held seats.

Critics blasted Heritage Action, a sister group to the Heritage Foundation, for appearing to support Trump’s alleged threat, and blasted the president as well.

“The president and one of the most influential conservative groups in the country are threatening to deprive all Indiana residents of paved roads, guard bases, and major projects if they don’t pass an extremely gerrymandered map to deprive voters of choice,” noted Isaac Saul, founder of Tangle News. “Awesome stuff.”

“Heritage sure loves authoritarianism,” remarked Media Matters researcher Zachary Pleat.

Calling it “nonsense,” Joel Griffith, a senior fellow at the conservative group Advancing American Freedom wrote: “Appalling to see @Heritage_Action endorse this unconstitutional threat by @realDonaldTrump. The President does not have power to coerce state legislators to redraw congressional maps.”

Others appeared to aim their ire directly at the president.

READ MORE: ‘Shaky’ House GOP Leadership ‘Losing Control’: Report

“This is the behavior of a madman,” declared Tim Carney, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.

“This isn’t conservative. This is fascist,” commented former Republican U.S. Congressman Joe Walsh.

Mother Jones’ D.C. bureau chief David Corn declared the move “dictatorial.”

“This does not sound like an appropriate or legal use of federal authority or presidential discretion,” observed Bloomberg columnist Matthew Yglesias.

“Nothing about this shakedown is conservative,” noted CNN’s Jake Tapper.

Jacob Stewart, the deputy opinion editor for the IndyStar called the move “illegal.”

Jonah Goldberg, editor-in-chief of the conservative online magazine The Dispatch, wrote: “I remember when Heritage cared about federalism, the rule of law, separation of powers, and all that stuff. Now it’s all ‘We love Trump’s musk, do what he says (or what Tucker says).'”

“This is called extortion,” wrote former White House correspondent Sam Youngman, also deeming it “illegal.”

“If this comes to pass,” wrote IndyStar columnist James Briggs, “then the story will be that Trump is punishing Indiana citizens for reasons that have nothing to do with them and so-called Indianans will see the punitive measures for what they are.”

READ MORE: ‘You’re a Loser Dude’: Carville Scorches Trump as ‘Done’

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Where Is Antifa Headquartered?’: FBI Official Struggles Defending Top Threat Label

Published

on

A top FBI official struggled to explain his claim that Antifa is the “most immediate violent threat” America is facing, as he was challenged to provide details.

Former Trump FBI Director Christopher Wray stated in 2020 congressional testimony that Antifa is “not a group or an organization. It’s a movement or an ideology.” The BBC has explained that Antifa is “a loosely organized, leftist movement that opposes far-right, racist and fascist groups.”

“Antifa is short for anti-fascist,” BBC added. “It is a loose, leaderless affiliation of mostly far-left activists.”

House Homeland Security Committee Ranking Member Bennie Thompson on Thursday asked Michael Glasheen, FBI National Security Operations Director, to describe “organizations that pose, on the domestic side,” the number one and number two threats to the homeland.

READ MORE: ‘Shaky’ House GOP Leadership ‘Losing Control’: Report

Glasheen asked for clarification.

“Any domestic terrorist organizations that poses a threat to the homeland as we speak,” Thompson replied.

Pointing to President Trump’s designation of Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization, Glasheen said, “That’s our primary concern right now.”

He described Antifa as “the most immediate violent threat that we’re facing on the domestic side.”

“So, where is the Antifa headquartered?” Thompson pressed.

After a pause, Glasheen said: “What we’re doing right now —” before Thompson cut him off.

“Where, in the United States, does Antifa exist?” he asked. “If it’s a terrorist organization — and you’ve identified it as number one.”

“We are building out the infrastructure right now,” Glasheen responded.

READ MORE: ‘You’re a Loser Dude’: Carville Scorches Trump as ‘Done’

“So what does that mean?” Thompson pressed. “Where do they exist? How many members do they have in the United States as of right now?”

“Well, that’s very fluid,” Glasheen said, describing it as “ongoing,” before comparing the situation to Al Qaeda and ISIS.

“I asked one question, sir,” Thompson replied. “I just want you to tell us. If you said Antifa is the number one domestic terrorist organization, operating in the United States, I just need to know where they are, how many people. I don’t want a name. I don’t want anything like that. Just, how many people have you identified with the FBI, that Antifa is made of?”

“Well, the investigations are active,” Glasheen replied.

“Sir, you wouldn’t come to this committee and say something you can’t prove. I know. I knew you wouldn’t do that. But you did.”

READ MORE: ‘His Heart Just Ain’t in It’: Report Reveals Trump’s ‘Achilles Heel’

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.