William Thomas, et. al. | Plaintiffs pro se, | | v. | C.A. No. 95-1018 | Judge Charles R. Richey The United States, et. al. | Defendants. |
agency, I do not think this means that the Court must accept everything the government says as true.
"Shortly thereafter, Francisco Martin Duran fired twenty-nine rounds from a semi-automatic assault rifle into the White House. ;LB,at 2. Subsequently, four additional security breaches at the White House were reported during the pendency of the Review, although none posed a serious threat to the President. Id. at 4.
" After an exhaustive investigation, the Review reported that it was not able to identify any alternative to prohibiting vehicular traffic on Pennsylvania Avenue that would ensure the protection of the President and others in the White House Complex from explosive devices carried by vehicles near the perimeter. "
historical. [1] Most of that history served as the basis of the government's First Amendment incursions accomplished in White House Vigil for the ERA v. Clark, 746 F.2d 1518, which, we can see, was allegedly prompted by,
for insuring that "emergency vehicles" not be obstructed, and that there was no intention to impede First Amendment activity in the closed section of Pennsylvania Avenue. The Court relies heavily upon the testimony of Captain Radzilowski's testimony to grant defendants' motions for summary judgment. Court's Memo, pgs. 13-20.
permitted to display the sign (as I believe it should be correctly characterized, according to the Lafayette Park regulations) at that location.
obvious questions have never been addressed. [4]
Respectfully submitted this 11th day of September, 1995.