The impact was immediate, and not unexpected. Salt Lake City was sued by the Anti-Hunger Action Committee, which would be prevented from protesting outside the governor's mansion, an unintended consequence of a law that cast a wide net to solve a localized problem.
Here's some background. For the past several years activists opposed to medical research using primates have targeted University of Utah researchers, demonstrating outside their homes in Salt Lake City, shouting through bullhorns.
It should be noted that such research is legal, is funded by the federal government, and is considered by some to be essential to finding cures for a wide range of human ailments. It should also be noted that the protesters find the experiments to be morally reprehensible, and they gathered on public sidewalks and streets to legally protest what they consider to be an unconscionable use of public tax dollars.
University officials and Mayor Rocky Anderson lobbied for the law, and the council listened carefully and responded quickly, passing legislation without a public hearing, and with minimal public discussion. We're not surprised. When you set out to stifle free speech, you're not inclined to talk about it, or give citizens a chance to sound off.
The sad part is, it didn't have to happen. There are already laws on the books to balance personal privacy with the right to demonstrate; laws that keep protesters and picketers in line without shredding the First Amendment.
If they're too loud, cite them under the noise ordinances. If they commit acts of vandalism, arrest them for destruction of property. If they block the streets or sidewalks, or stray onto private property, charge them with disorderly conduct or trespassing.
But don't pass laws that restrict the First Amendment rights of thousands of citizens just to protect the privacy of a few.
When you set out to stifle free speech, you're not inclined to talk about it, or give citizens a chance to sound off.
