Exhibit A: Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit, South Dist Court of Ohio

Please pick up THE TRIFOLD on INDESTRUCTIBLE PAPER on DeleteLawZ dot com for $25.00. We ship it from Los Angeles. OR -- get the Trifold you PRINT AT HOME for free by Put "FreeTrifold" (When you go to Purchase the $15 Digital Download, that's WHEN you put the ONE WORD, FreeTrifold in and then you print it at home)

DeleteLawZ dot com

Thanks,
Chille
@ChilleDeCastro PayPal
@Chille-DeCastro Venmo
$ChilleDeCastro Cashapp
You have a right to protest.

The most significant limit on your right to protest is in the language of the First Amendment, which prohibits government interference with the right to assemble "peaceably." The U.S. Supreme Court long ago recognized the government's right to stop demonstrations that present a "clear and present danger" of violence or another "immediate threat to public safety, peace, or order" (Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940)).

Without this kind of immediate threat, courts have generally held that police don't have the right to clear out a political demonstration just because they fear possible disorder or because protesters are "raucous," make the cops or other people mad, or slow traffic. (See, for example, Cox v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 536 (1965) and Jones v. Parmley, 465 F.3d 46 (2nd Cir. 2006).)

The upshot of these standards set out by the courts: Law enforcement may break up violent protests and arrest participants who engage in violence or property destruction. You shouldn't be arrested just because you were present at a demonstration where other people violated the law, unless you directly incited them to violence. Nor should officers arrest you simply for yelling or cursing at them.