FEDERAL APPEALS COURT STRIKES DOWN BAN ON DEMONSTRATING ON THE

GROUNDS OF THE CAPITOL; CASE WAS INITIATED WHEN ARTIST ROBERT

LEDERMAN WAS ARRESTED PASSING OUT FLYERS DURING ARTS ADVOCACY WEEK
WASHINGTON, DC -- On May 31, a federal appeals court struck down a
30-year old ban which forbade leafleting and other "demonstration
activit[ies]" on the sidewalk at the foot of the House and Senate
steps on the East Front of the United States Capitol.
In ROBERT LEDERMAN, V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Circuit Judges
Harry T. Edwards and David S. Tatel and Senior Circuit Judge
Laurence H. Silberman found the demonstration ban
unconstitutional, stating that "...courts have long recognized
that the Capitol Grounds as a whole meet the definition of a
traditional public forum: They have traditionally been open to the
public, and their intended use is consistent with public
expression."
The case, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, (Neal
Goldfarb, lead attorney) was initiated when New York City artist
Robert Lederman was arrested on Arts Advocacy Day in March 1997
while he was passing out leaflets about then NYC Mayor Rudolph
Giuliani's efforts to eliminate street artists. At the time Mayor
Giuliani was appealing a ruling by the 2nd Circuit Federal Appeals
Court which had overturned the City's licensing requirement for
street artists and had granted visual artists full First Amendment
protection. In June 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the New
York City Giuliani Administration's appeal.
In the Capitol demonstration opinion, written by Judge Tatel, the
court noted that "The ban's absolute nature might be less
troubling if - in accordance with the third principle - all listed
demonstration activities could reasonably be expected to interfere
with the stated objectives of traffic control and safety. Some
banned activities, however, cannot possibly pose that risk. For
example, a single leafleteer standing on the East Front sidewalk
will no more likely block traffic or threaten security than will
photographers, star-struck tourists, and landscape painters
complete with easels, but the Board has made no effort to keep any
of these latter individuals away from the Capitol."
Citing POLICE DEP'T OF CHICAGO V. MOSLEY, 408 U.S. 92, 101 (1972),
Tatel emphasized that "'Freedom of expression ... would rest on a
soft foundation indeed if government could distinguish' between
demonstrators and pedestrians on 'a wholesale and categorical
basis,' without providing evidence that demonstrators pose a
greater risk to identified government interests than do

pedestrians."
The WASHINGTON POST editorialized that "IN STRIKING down
demonstrations in parts of the Capitol grounds, the D.C.
Court of Appeals has issued a pointed reminder that some
even after Sept. 11 -- should not be blithely sacrificed
name of security."

a ban on
Circuit
values -in the

"...the sidewalk at issue here wraps around the Capitol's East

Front almost without interruption, providing pedestrian access to
the entire front of the building in addition to the doors, thereby
facilitating tourist access to the Capitol - a centerpiece of our
democracy," the court observed.

"THERE WAS NO INTENTION TO CHALLENGE ANY LAW OR GET IN 'TROUBLE' I

WAS JUST TRYING TO INFORM A FEW PEOPLE ABOUT OUR STREET ARTIST
LAWSUIT. I NEVER IMAGINED I WOULD HAVE ANY PROBLEM DOING THAT IN
THE US CAPITAL, AND WAS I EVER WRONG" - Robert Lederman
For Lederman, the roles of artist/activist are now totally
intertwined, he told Arts Wire Current. "In fact, now my art is
being an activist.
"I was totally apolitical until the street artist arrest policy
began. Then Giuliani began targeting me personally for arrest as
the President of A.R.T.I.S.T. That's what made me an activist -as a means of self defense against Giuliani," he said. "Every time
I try to go back to just being an artist NYC pulls me back in,
like they did a month ago when the Bloomberg administration
illegally seized and crushed 20 SoHo street artist displays in a
garbage truck." Last week a group of Black artists were arrested
for peacefully performing outside City Hall, he added.
The Washington, DC case grew out of nothing more than trying to
give out a few leaflets on Arts Advocacy Day, Lederman observed .
His intention had not been to challenge any law or make trouble.
"I was just trying to inform a few people about our street artist
lawsuit. I never imagined I would have any problem doing that in
the US capital, and was I ever wrong. Being an artist though can
get one into hot water - if you are doing it right."
Robert Lederman thinks its important for all people to address the
political process, especially in the post 9/11 where so much is
at stake. "As the 2nd circuit Federal Appeals court ruled in my
first lawsuit, visual art may be even more communicative than a

newspaper. Why waste that ability to communicate on anything less

than whatever you consider most vital?" he asks.
He urges artists to "Use your artistic power to counteract the
bigger powers that are misshaping our world. Use your art to do
what even an army can't do. Use your art as a weapon in a
worthwhile struggle because if you don't, soon enough you'll find
yourself having to use real weapons and wishing you'd used your
art instead. Recognize that defending full First Amendment
freedom is not just a little something on the side but that it
should be your main course. Once that's gone none of the rest will
mean very much."
Sources/resources:
ROBERT LEDERMAN, V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/dc/015157.html
STREET ARTIST INFORMATION AND FEDERAL COURT RULINGS
1998-2002 -- http://baltech.org/lederman/
1994-1998 -- http://www.openair.org/alerts/artist/nyc.html
Editorial
"No Ban on Demonstrations"
THE WASHINGTON POST -http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61053-2002Jun4.1.html
June 5, 2002
"Street Artist Federal Ruling Stands; Supreme Court Rejects
Giuliani Appeal"
Arts Wire CURRENT -http://www.artswire.org/current/1997/cur061097.html
June 10, 1997
_______________________________________________________