Hey, Hey! Ho, Ho! These Mass Arrests Have Got to Go! : The Expressive Fourth Amendment Argument

The racial justice protests ignited by the murder of George Floyd in May 2020 constitute the largest protest movement in the United States. Estimates suggest that between fifteen and twenty-six million people protested across the country during the summer of 2020 alone. Not only were the number of protestors staggering, but so were the number of arrests. Within one week of when the video of George Floyd’s murder went viral, police arrested ten thousand people demanding justice on American streets, with police often arresting activists en masse. This Essay explores mass arrests and how they square with Fourth Amendment protections, as conceived by its Framers. The first part of this Essay provides an account of mass arrests during the George Floyd protests in Los Angeles, the city with the largest number of reported arrests in the initial demonstrations. The second part of this Essay begins by briefly reviewing the Expressive Fourth Amendment, a doctrine the author previously introduced, which posits that the Framers designed the Fourth Amendment to protect freedom of expression, in addition to the prevailing understanding of its safeguard of bodily integrity. The Expressive Fourth Amendment shields from government overreach individuals engaged in political expressive conduct. Here, this Essay expands upon this doctrine by querying how this protection should apply to mass arrests during protests and ultimately concludes that courts should demand both that a police officer establish probable cause for each protester swept up in a mass arrest and that judges positively weigh an individual’s expressive conduct when determining whether an arrest was reasonable in the totality of the circumstances

An Argument Against Unbounded Arrest Power: The Expressive Fourth Amendment and Protesting While Black

Protesting is supposed to be revered in our democracy, considered “as American as apple pie” in our nation’s mythology. But the actual experiences of the 2020 racial justice protesters showed that this supposed reverence for political dissent and protest is more akin to American folklore than reality on the streets. The images from those streets depicted police officers clad in riot gear and armed with shields, batons, and “less than” lethal weapons aggressively arresting protesters, often en masse. In the first week of the George Floyd protests, police arrested roughly 10,000 people, and approximately 78 percent of those arrests were for nonviolent misdemeanor offenses or criminal violations. Moreover, troubling figures regarding the racial breakdown of protest-related arrests, along with anecdotes from activists, suggest that just as with routine policing, the experiences of Black and white people differ during protests—even when they protest side by side—with police potentially targeting Black activists for arrest. This Article exposes how police officers’ easy access to a wide arsenal of criminal charges serves to trample on expressive freedoms and explains how a new and clearer understanding of the Fourth Amendment’s application to expressive conduct should curb the police’s seemingly unbounded power to arrest protesters. In Part I of this Article, I revisit and review the roots and rationale of the Expressive Fourth Amendment doctrine, which posits that there is an expressive component to Fourth Amendment protection. In Part II, I discuss the criminal statutes that police often use to make arrests during protests and then focus more narrowly on the arrests in New York City in the early days of the George Floyd demonstrations, including the racial makeup of arrestees. In Part III, I explain how the presiding understanding of the Fourth Amendment places minimal limits on a police officer’s ability to arrest, regardless of an individual’s engagement in expressive political conduct. Thereafter, I describe how the Expressive Fourth Amendment should apply to arrests and serve to curtail an officer’s ability to engage in warrantless arrests of protesters for nonviolent misdemeanors

Hey, Hey! Ho, Ho! These Mass Arrests Have Got to Go! : The Expressive Fourth Amendment Argument

The racial justice protests ignited by the murder of George Floyd in May 2020 constitute the largest protest movement in the United States. Estimates suggest that between fifteen and twenty-six million people protested across the country during the summer of 2020 alone. Not only were the number of protestors staggering, but so were the number of arrests. Within one week of when the video of George Floyd’s murder went viral, police arrested ten thousand people demanding justice on American streets, with police often arresting activists en masse. This Essay explores mass arrests and how they square with Fourth Amendment protections, as conceived by its Framers. The first part of this Essay provides an account of mass arrests during the George Floyd protests in Los Angeles, the city with the largest number of reported arrests in the initial demonstrations. The second part of this Essay begins by briefly reviewing the Expressive Fourth Amendment, a doctrine the author previously introduced, which posits that the Framers designed the Fourth Amendment to protect freedom of expression, in addition to the prevailing understanding of its safeguard of bodily integrity. The Expressive Fourth Amendment shields from government overreach individuals engaged in political expressive conduct. Here, this Essay expands upon this doctrine by querying how this protection should apply to mass arrests during protests and ultimately concludes that courts should demand both that a police officer establish probable cause for each protester swept up in a mass arrest and that judges positively weigh an individual’s expressive conduct when determining whether an arrest was reasonable in the totality of the circumstances

An Argument Against Unbounded Arrest Power: The Expressive Fourth Amendment and Protesting While Black

Protesting is supposed to be revered in our democracy, considered “as American as apple pie” in our nation’s mythology. But the actual experiences of the 2020 racial justice protesters showed that this supposed reverence for political dissent and protest is more akin to American folklore than reality on the streets. The images from those streets depicted police officers clad in riot gear and armed with shields, batons, and “less than” lethal weapons aggressively arresting protesters, often en masse. In the first week of the George Floyd protests, police arrested roughly 10,000 people, and approximately 78 percent of those arrests were for nonviolent misdemeanor offenses or criminal violations. Moreover, troubling figures regarding the racial breakdown of protest-related arrests, along with anecdotes from activists, suggest that just as with routine policing, the experiences of Black and white people differ during protests—even when they protest side by side—with police potentially targeting Black activists for arrest. This Article exposes how police officers’ easy access to a wide arsenal of criminal charges serves to trample on expressive freedoms and explains how a new and clearer understanding of the Fourth Amendment’s application to expressive conduct should curb the police’s seemingly unbounded power to arrest protesters. In Part I of this Article, I revisit and review the roots and rationale of the Expressive Fourth Amendment doctrine, which posits that there is an expressive component to Fourth Amendment protection. In Part II, I discuss the criminal statutes that police often use to make arrests during protests and then focus more narrowly on the arrests in New York City in the early days of the George Floyd demonstrations, including the racial makeup of arrestees. In Part III, I explain how the presiding understanding of the Fourth Amendment places minimal limits on a police officer’s ability to arrest, regardless of an individual’s engagement in expressive political conduct. Thereafter, I describe how the Expressive Fourth Amendment should apply to arrests and serve to curtail an officer’s ability to engage in warrantless arrests of protesters for nonviolent misdemeanors

POV: Since When Should a Misdemeanor Carry a Death Sentence?

In Massachusetts, you can be sentenced to up to two-and-a-half years for shoplifting. Admittedly, you are unlikely to receive this sentence upon your first conviction, but if this is one of multiple shoplifting convictions or you violated probation, you may end up serving time in jail. The same is true for driving without a license, and certainly for drug possession. A first charge of distribution of any type of drug near a park or school means a two-year mandatory minimum sentence. As a matter of fact, about 27 percent of male and 36 percent of female prisoners in Massachusetts are serving time for nonviolent offenses. As we all know, incarceration affects people of color differently. In Massachusetts, African Americans are eight times more likely to be incarcerated, and Latinos four times more likely, than their white counterparts

An Argument Against Unbounded Arrest Power: The Expressive Fourth Amendment and Protesting While Black

Protesting is supposed to be revered in our democracy, considered “as American as apple pie” in our nation’s mythology. But the actual experiences of the 2020 racial justice protesters showed that this supposed reverence for political dissent and protest is more akin to American folklore than reality on the streets. The images from those streets depicted police officers clad in riot gear and armed with shields, batons, and “less than” lethal weapons aggressively arresting protesters, often en masse. In the first week of the George Floyd protests, police arrested roughly 10,000 people, and approximately 78 percent of those arrests were for nonviolent misdemeanor offenses or criminal violations. Moreover, troubling figures regarding the racial breakdown of protest-related arrests, along with anecdotes from activists, suggest that just as with routine policing, the experiences of Black and white people differ during protests—even when they protest side by side—with police potentially targeting Black activists for arrest. This Article exposes how police officers’ easy access to a wide arsenal of criminal charges serves to trample on expressive freedoms and explains how a new and clearer understanding of the Fourth Amendment’s application to expressive conduct should curb the police’s seemingly unbounded power to arrest protesters. In Part I of this Article, I revisit and review the roots and rationale of the Expressive Fourth Amendment doctrine, which posits that there is an expressive component to Fourth Amendment protection. In Part II, I discuss the criminal statutes that police often use to make arrests during protests and then focus more narrowly on the arrests in New York City in the early days of the George Floyd demonstrations, including the racial makeup of arrestees. In Part III, I explain how the presiding understanding of the Fourth Amendment places minimal limits on a police officer’s ability to arrest, regardless of an individual’s engagement in expressive political conduct. Thereafter, I describe how the Expressive Fourth Amendment should apply to arrests and serve to curtail an officer’s ability to engage in warrantless arrests of protesters for nonviolent misdemeanors

Hey, Hey! Ho, Ho! These Mass Arrests Have Got to Go! : The Expressive Fourth Amendment Argument

The racial justice protests ignited by the murder of George Floyd in May 2020 constitute the largest protest movement in the United States. Estimates suggest that between fifteen and twenty-six million people protested across the country during the summer of 2020 alone. Not only were the number of protestors staggering, but so were the number of arrests. Within one week of when the video of George Floyd’s murder went viral, police arrested ten thousand people demanding justice on American streets, with police often arresting activists en masse. This Essay explores mass arrests and how they square with Fourth Amendment protections, as conceived by its Framers. The first part of this Essay provides an account of mass arrests during the George Floyd protests in Los Angeles, the city with the largest number of reported arrests in the initial demonstrations. The second part of this Essay begins by briefly reviewing the Expressive Fourth Amendment, a doctrine the author previously introduced, which posits that the Framers designed the Fourth Amendment to protect freedom of expression, in addition to the prevailing understanding of its safeguard of bodily integrity. The Expressive Fourth Amendment shields from government overreach individuals engaged in political expressive conduct. Here, this Essay expands upon this doctrine by querying how this protection should apply to mass arrests during protests and ultimately concludes that courts should demand both that a police officer establish probable cause for each protester swept up in a mass arrest and that judges positively weigh an individual’s expressive conduct when determining whether an arrest was reasonable in the totality of the circumstances

Massachusetts Should Become A \u27Sanctuary State\u27

Amid the turmoil of Donald Trump\u27s early presidency, there is no doubt that noncitizens are in the administration’s crosshairs. This is consistent with candidate Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric. Still, few outside his inner circle could have predicted the scope, breadth and swiftness of the president’s actions

POV: Since When Should a Misdemeanor Carry a Death Sentence?

In Massachusetts, you can be sentenced to up to two-and-a-half years for shoplifting. Admittedly, you are unlikely to receive this sentence upon your first conviction, but if this is one of multiple shoplifting convictions or you violated probation, you may end up serving time in jail. The same is true for driving without a license, and certainly for drug possession. A first charge of distribution of any type of drug near a park or school means a two-year mandatory minimum sentence. As a matter of fact, about 27 percent of male and 36 percent of female prisoners in Massachusetts are serving time for nonviolent offenses. As we all know, incarceration affects people of color differently. In Massachusetts, African Americans are eight times more likely to be incarcerated, and Latinos four times more likely, than their white counterparts