Bowser Had 'Black Lives Matter' Painted On A D.C. Street. Other Groups Say They Should Get A Turn

[mahatmakanejeeves]

"Congress shall make no law."

Hat tip, Greater Greater Washington

Breakfast links: Should public expression on streets be allowed for all groups?
By Latisha Johnson (Contributor) August 6, 2020

AUG 5, 4:34 PM

Bowser Had ‘Black Lives Matter’ Painted On A D.C. Street. Now Other Groups Say They Should Get A Turn
Martin Austermuhle



A mural that says ‘Baby Lives Matter’ outside a D.C. Planned Parenthood.

Courtesy of Karen Ramsey

It’s a fight over D.C.’s streets, literally.

In the wake of Mayor Muriel Bowser’s attention-grabbing painting of the words “Black Lives Matter” along a two-block stretch of 16th Street NW in early June, a pair of conservative groups is now waging a fight to gain the same right to have their messages displayed on city asphalt.

And the fight is not limited to D.C.: a similar street mural in Tulsa could soon be removed after a pro-police group sought to paint its own message on another street, while “Back the Blue” was painted on a street in front of Tampa’s police department over the weekend.

The fight started last month, when conservative legal advocacy group Judicial Watch sued D.C. over claims that it hasn’t been given the chance to paint its slogan — “Because No One Is Above the Law!” — on a city street. The group says that the city’s failure to let it request a permit is a violation of the First Amendment.

In July, an anti-abortion activist painted “Baby Lives Matter” on the street in front of a Planned Parenthood Clinic on Fourth Street NE. (A similar street mural was painted in Salt Lake City in mid-July, and the artist is raising money to paint murals in other cities.) And last weekend, two anti-abortion activists were arrested after attempting to write “Black Pre-Born Lives Matter” in chalk on the sidewalk in front of the same clinic.

That group, Students for Life of America, now says it plans on suing D.C. over the arrests. Kristan Hawkins, the group’s president, says that if “Black Lives Matter” can remain painted on a city street, other messages must also be allowed on them.

“She’s opened up the streets for public expression from any group,” says Hawkins, referring to Bowser. “The mayor doesn’t get to choose what speech is allowed on streets and what’s not.”

{snip}

[mr_lebowski]

1. I can definitely see both sides to this particular argument (nt)

[The Wielding Truth]

2. Unborn baby's lives are not born yet. Their lives are not yet separate from their mother's so this

is really mute. I'm not saying that I don't support any pregnancy that is desired and wanted and accepted by the mother or the mother determines the responsibility for that independent life to be.

[MichMan]

3. They aren't wrong

[abqtommy]

4. The streets are paid for by taxpayers so the taxpayers own them. Religious symbols abound

but some Christians put the Satanists down. Who gets the right to self-expression? I'm fine with BLM but having a swastika painted on the street would certainly raise my ire. Let's go and find out just
what the will of the people is...