Judge bars protesters from Walmart

[alp227]

Source: Baltimore Sun

A Maryland judge barred Walmart protesters on Tuesday from company property in advance of widespread demonstrations planned for Black Friday.

Anne Arundel County Circuit Judge Paul Harris also ordered activists to post a $10,000 bond, which they would forfeit if they violate the injunction before the trespassing case brought by Wal-Mart Stores Inc. in September goes to trial.

"This is yet another move from Walmart to try to bend the law to its liking. Walmart has made it a practice to pursue over-the-top legal maneuvers to try to avoid hearing the real concerns of workers and community members," said Derrick Plummer, spokesman for the organizer, Making Change at Walmart, in a statement.

About 1,500 demonstrations were scheduled to occur nationwide on Friday, including at Walmarts in Towson and Arbutus. Plummer said activities planned for Black Friday would go forward, but declined to say where.



Read more: http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bs-bz-walmart-20131126-1,0,4283804.story

[Scuba]

1. WalMart's investment in our legal system continues to pay dividends.

[Heather MC]

34. Would it be cheaper to pay employees a living wage

Than pay lawyers to block that pay??

[Scuba]

36. Perhaps, but what's the fun if you can't exploit your workers?

[Diego_Native 2012]

51. It is easier to screw a million people out of $1

...than to screw $1M out of a lawyer.

[Sirveri]

75. Lawyers are on retainer, they'll get paid no matter what, best to use them.

Otherwise, why are you paying them, right?

Now if we flooded them with lawsuits, they might get over extended. I could see the younger debt slaves being able to do this since they have nothing to lose and can just ignore a judgement against them to pay court costs.

[TBF]

2. Rec for visibility. nt

[diabeticman]

3. So much for our legal system being just

[HelenWheels]

4. Judge rules against Constitution

His ruling is against freedom to assemble and freedom of speech.

[bigdarryl]

5. Didn't the Supreme Court rule on this issue

The Westboro baptist church ruling where the crazies were protesting at soldiers funerals the court said it was FREE SPEECH so this judge is an idiot.Wouldn't surprise me if this judge has stock in Walmart. Here's the ruling http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/02/westboro-baptist-church-w_n_830209.html

[joeglow3]

15. The judge ruled in line with the Supreme Court

Westboro doesn't have a right to protest on other people's private property. You want to re-read the two articles again.

[WinkyDink]

16. NOT on private property, which commercial land is.

[cstanleytech]

25. I thought it only protected your speech being censored by the government not by corporations?

Even if it doesnt if its private property and the owner tells you to stay off in general arent you supposed to do so?

[AAO]

31. Isn't Wall-Mart considered private property?

If so, freedom of speech, and freedom to assemble don't come into play. Just being a shitty, greedy, heartless corporation is all they can be accused of.

[Omaha Steve]

39. Sidewalks in front of of a business have almost always been legal for protesters!!!

Most of the time, not always.

[loli phabay]

41. not if like wamart and you own the land around the business

Ie the parlking lots, truck loading areas etc are private property.

[Omaha Steve]

42. Wrong

The sidewalk is considered open game unless fenced off. I just corrected a Starbucks manager on this Monday and told him to call 911. Dispatcher explained to him WHY they wouldn't come. IF they do come ask for a Sgt. Also watch the special Morgan Spurlock's CNN documentary from several months ago.

[loli phabay]

43. no, right, if its private property then you have no right to trespass, the sidewalks and parking l

Lot of walmart are private property, they are maintained and kept clear by walmart, though tjey are law enforcement dedicated for fire lanes they are private property. If you want to protest youbstand on the city, county or state maintained road and sidewalk.

[Omaha Steve]

45. THe Hinky Dinky strike in the 80's changed NE law

Mass picketing law struck down and sidewalks not fenced in were both settled in NE Court.

Like I said watch Spurlock's CNN video on unions from a few months ago. I'm eating dinner and will be back with links as time allows later.

I'm a Veteran of 100's of protests on private property not fenced off in several states over 40 years. I can be seen on the documentary film (check the IMDB) Saving the Indians Hills having a fight with security and winning on the point. Our lawyer was there.

Omaha Steve

[loli phabay]

46. well dont know about Nebraska, but i have problems with people being allowed to trespass

Whatever the reason.

[Omaha Steve]

47. if t isn't fenced it is considered PUBLIC in mst states!!!!

That is why many companies FENCE up to the property line, sometimes miles away.

[loli phabay]

48. they should just post it, and if told to leave you should, regardless ofwho or what owns the land

Property rights are important.

[Omaha Steve]

50. So Walmart needs a sign that tells everyone to stay off the required by code sidewalk?

How would a walk up customer shop there? Most FRONT sidewalks that run along the street ARE public property, even though Walmart has to shovel the snow by law in most communities.

Would you like me to snail mail you the Spurlock documentary?

[loli phabay]

54. depends on the layout, the mall near me is all private property

From the county road all the way to the stores and posted as such. Basically you are there at the pwrmission of the property owner and if asked to leave and you dont then its trespass. Same thing if you come on my driveway from the county road.

[Omaha Steve]

64. Up to the properly line

But access can't be blocked or restricted. I can't park a car on the driveway outside your property line to deny you access. But I can stand on your sidewalk or driveway outside your property line as long as I don't refuse to move when you leave or enter on the driveway. Lets say you and I don't agree on a political point. I can stand on posted keep off in a yard outside your property line and protest in the yard YOU maintain. Ask any abortion protester.

[Kingofalldems]

52. Property rights are important to Republicans for sure.

They love to hide behind them.

Of course these people these protestors are no threat to the property of Walmart.

[loli phabay]

53. proprty rights are important to everyone, or do you think its okay for me to walk into your home

Or on your land.

[Kingofalldems]

55. Come on. Their parking lot is open to the public.

There is absolutely no comparison to someone's yard. You've taken the republican position on walking the picket lines.

[loli phabay]

57. no the parking lot is open at their discretion, if asked to leave then its trespass if you dont

No problem with picketing but i place property rights as one of the top rights we have.

[Kingofalldems]

58. As a Democrat I support the workers.

Whose side are you on?

[loli phabay]

60. i am on the rights of everyone including the property rights of people

Your rights end where mine begin.

[Kingofalldems]

61. So you side with billionnaires over people making minimum wage.

I understand fully now.

[loli phabay]

62. lol, seems that i am for equal rights for all whereas you are happy to pick and choose who gets

Rights and when. I understand you even more fully now.

[Kingofalldems]

63. Yeah I'm a Democrat who is concerned about the rights of workers.

Are you a republican?

[loli phabay]

65. no, i value the rights of all.

[Kingofalldems]

67. For Democrats the rights of workers trump the

minor inconvenience of a billionaire.

[OrwellwasRight]

69. Actually, standing for property rights is not standing for equal rights for all.

Property is passed down from generation to generation, not distributed newly each generation on the basis of merit. Once you take property, you can then earn money off of it without working hard (this is called rents). Property laws have been used to steal land from native Americans, to prevent free speech, to enforce racist restrictive covenants, etc. They have even been used to try to overturn regulations and conservation efforts. Property rights in themselves discriminate in favor of property holders. They do not treat all citizens equally. I would not elevate them as highly as you do. They are not sacrosanct.

[Ranchemp.]

79. Hear, hear.

It seems that when it comes to Walmart, some think it's ok to violate property rights.

[Omaha Steve]

56. Air ports are private property in most cases

Have you ever seen a law to keep the Hare Krishna's out of them???? Look it up.

[loli phabay]

59. no they are pretty much tolerated, but go to dulles and tell me what happens to the buskers there

Thats right they are told to leave. Property owners can allow who ever they want on their property.

[Omaha Steve]

66. I give up you win

Cause I won't argue with a wall.

[Paolo123]

72. results of alert

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Nov 27, 2013, 07:02 PM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: Poster is a returnee, vadawg, who got banned from DU2 for being pro-DADT. His being here again in new form is a blemish on the website.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: OS, I think you're misreading the post. He says you should leave property if asked to, not that you can't protest, particularly on your own land (who would ask you to leave your own land?) Sorry, but I don't think this is hideable.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The poster sounds like a dumbass, but last I checked posting stupid stuff isn't a TOS violation. The alerter should get some kind of penalty for wasting our time with this.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Say wha?!? Put down the crack pipe.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Kingofalldems]

77. Interesting comment from juror #1.

[loli phabay]

80. yes it is is it not.

[Ranchemp.]

81. Interesting comment from him.

I saw how he tried to twist your words all around, go for you for not falling for it.

[socialist_n_TN]

87. Yes. Property rights are ALWAYS more important than any other rights........

Ain't capitalism lovely??

[AAO]

49. I meant their property, not the cities.

[icymist]

38. They need to prove they can afford $10,000 worth of free speech first...

<snip>
County Circuit Judge Paul Harris also ordered activists to post a $10,000 bond, which they would forfeit if they violate the injunction before the trespassing case brought by Wal-Mart Stores Inc. in September goes to trial.

[X_Digger]

73. If this were government property, not private- then your comment would be apropos.

There is no free speech in my living room, or on most private property. Me telling you to go elsewhere to protest is not a violation of free speech (I'm not the government.)

[Ranchemp.]

86. The judge didn't rule against freedom to assemble or freedom of speech,

he ruled that unless Walmart gives permission, the protesters have no legal right to protest on Walmart property, the protesters can assemble on public property and give all the speeches they want.

[mtasselin]

6. constitution

What constitution, they have been chipping away at it for years. If there is a strike you can only have so many people on the picket line. Jump forward to the patriot act of 2001, Russ Feingold warned the American people about it and nobody would listen.

[bigdarryl]

8. I see your point but see my post above the Supreme Court already ruled on this issue of protesting

[Saviolo]

7. The Golden Rule

If you have the gold, you make the rules. Also, you can break the rules with impunity, but face no consequences.

[Orrex]

9. So protestors are barred from protesting the company on the company's property?

What am I missing here?

[Niceguy1]

70. that property

Rights are selective and depend on who's side you are on

[Township75]

82. Walmarts property, Walmarts choice..

This isn't a problem.

[Niceguy1]

84. for some here it is..

[ancianita]

10. Can they protest in the public sidewalks and streets that surround it, though. I bet they can.

[Vincardog]

30. They can

[joeglow3]

11. I fucking hate when people want to shit on the Constitution because they hate Walmart

This has NOTHING to do with Walmart. It is common fucking sense that you don't have a right to protest on my property. You sure as shit can protest on the sidewalk in front of my house, just as these people can protest on the sidewalks in front of Walmart.

Fuck, sometimes people's hatred for something causes them to lose ALL critical thinking skills.

[rhett o rick]

17. So you are worried about violating Walmart's constitutional rights?

Of all the rights violations going on today, Walmart's are way, way down on my list to worry about.

[joeglow3]

19. Are you intentionally trying to be obtuse?

Do you understand how precedent works? If the judge rules against Walmart, than any shithead could camp out on my property and claim free speech due to the precedent set. Thus, I don't give a shit about Walmart. I DO give a shit about me losing Constitutionally protected rights because you hate Walmart.

Like I said, some people's hatred of Walmart makes them lose all fucking common sense.

[Orrex]

20. You have a Constitutional right to protest on private property?

[joeglow3]

21. You are bullshitting me, right?

The judge in this case ruled that no, you do not. Thus, they are pissed, claiming s/he was bought and paid for by Walmart. I am saying s/he ruled correctly because you do NOT have that. And I am damn glad because I don't want to get up my personal property rights so I can feel good for 5 minutes about Walmart losing a court case.

[Orrex]

22. Easy there, fireball

I replied to the wrong post, okay?

No need to rip your own face off and run around screaming like an ass-bit lunatic.

[joeglow3]

23. No problem

I also mistook you for the person who replied above.

[rhett o rick]

24. Speaking of "obtuse", you should read your own posts. I dont need this shit. Go vent

on someone else.

[joeglow3]

27. Thank you for answering "Yes"

[bobclark86]

32. Wow...

Private property. Chill out and go stand on the sidewalk with the protesters, where they should be. That way, people driving by, rather than just stopping, will see.

[rhett o rick]

37. I am not the one with my hair on fire. I simply stated that I was not about to feel sorry for

Walmart. Apparently that deserves derision. Please keep perspective.

[ancianita]

33. Yeah, but anyone aware enough to protest should already know the law against doing it on private

property, anyway. This shouldn't be some shocking revelation.

[geardaddy]

12. kick and rec

Solidarity!

[eggplant]

13. He didn't say they couldn't protest. He said they couldn't do it on private property.

What I'm expecting is a false-flag operation, where someone in mgmt will violate the injunction pretending to be a protester, to cost them their $10k bond.

[BeatleBoot]

14. K&R

[Populist_Prole]

18. They didn't protest correctly

They should have broght guns, wore stars & stripes or "don't tread on me" shirts and hoisted misspelled signs. Then fascists would have left them alone and the MSM would give them favorable coverage.

[canoeist52]

26. What this means is that they are very afraid.

The class war is on.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

28. This is really a non-story

Protesting on private property when the owner objects is pretty much illegal. The unions who protest Wal-Mart here stand on public property just outside the parking lot.

[muriel_volestrangler]

29. How can he demand money from activists about a case brought in September?

That case is sub judice. It has already been decided they should not be kept in jail pending the court appearance. What justification has the judge for demanding money from them now? This seems like extortion, to me. He can tell them they cannot do another protest on private property, but since when has the state been able to demand money before any law has been broken?

[Enthusiast]

35. Fascism

[RBInMaine]

44. Just protest on the closest public property, such as the area near the entrance to the store.

[Major Hogwash]

68. Because Walmart needs that $10,000.

Or else they won't be able to open their 4000th store in China next January.

[gopiscrap]

71. alright then everybody "individually"

go into a Wal Mart and load your carts up with stuff from all over the store and then when it gets all rung up, announce that you changed your mind and don't that stuff after all!

[blkmusclmachine]

74. Low, low

ball tactics.

[happyslug]

76. More Articles on this matter:

http://www.capitalgazette.com/news/for_the_record/anne-arundel-judge-restricts-black-friday-protests-at-walmart/article_02219096-b8c4-55ac-9742-4e94caafc574.html

In 2012, organizers staged a demonstration at a the Walmart in Severn that resulted in the police being called. According to the lawsuit, the manager said protestors refused to leave the property as they gave out cupcakes to visiting patrons.
A similar demonstrated also occurred two months ago in Bowie, just across the Prince George's County line. Managers called police after a group of protesters refused to leave the store grounds, the company claims.

[Ranchemp.]

78. No problem with this ruling,

the judge didn't bar them from protesting on public property, he ruled that unless Walmart gives permission, the protesters have no right to protest on Walmart property.

[The Straight Story]

83. Indeed, imagine if this were an abortion clinic

Guessing some would be changing their tunes.

[Ranchemp.]

85. I have no doubt that would be the case.