Should members of Black Lives Matter or Showing Up for Racial Justice be able to demonstrate at the Lee monument?
How about members of the Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy, or the Richmond Peace Education Center?
What about a group of VCU students? Or residents of Monument Avenue itself?
In every case, the answer is an emphatic yes. The monument stands on public property. People have a First Amendment right to voice their opinions there.
Despite that, in the wake of the Charlottesville riot, Gov. Terry McAuliffe imposed a temporary ban on all demonstrations at the Lee monument. As we noted in an earlier editorial, that amounts to unconstitutional prior restraint.
Until recently, this was an academic debate. But it has taken on some urgency now that a neo-Confederate group has announced plans to demonstrate at the monument on September 16. Counter-protests seem likely.
McAuliffe is understandably concerned about public safety — and nobody wants to see a repeat of the mayhem in Charlottesville. But if the mere potential for mayhem is enough to justify banning demonstrations, then practically no demonstrations ever will be allowed. As the ACLU of Virginia noted, “it is a sad reality of this moment that nearly every protest carries with it a risk of violence.”
Indeed, if the potential for violence becomes an excuse for censorship, then any group — or even a single individual — can shut down public debate simply by calling in an anonymous threat against any protest by any group. In effect, the governor’s approach would give political antagonists a state-enforced veto over their opponents’ right to free speech.
That is precisely the opposite of what government should do. Government’s fundamental duty entails protecting people’s rights against the threat of violence — not abrogating those rights at the first hint of it.
