Assignment 3

M E M O R A N D U M

To:  You, Associate, Arcadia Civil Liberties Union

From:  D. Gewirtzman, Legal Director, Arcadia Civil Liberties Union

Re:  New Potential Client: Roseanne Connor

As you know, Roseanne Connor is currently running as a candidate for Governor of Arcadia. As you also may have heard, there was an incident at her campaign rally that raises some interesting constitutional issues. Here’s the story:

Last week, Roseanne held a campaign rally at a privately owned stadium in downtown Springfield, the capital of Arcadia. Jackie and Darlene attended Roseanne’s campaign rally for the purposes of peacefully protesting her candidacy. As Roseanne was giving a speech from the stage at the rally, Jackie and Darlene began to chant “Hey hey, ho ho, Roseanne Connor has got to go!” Roseanne stopped her speech and yelled to the crowd: “Get ‘em out of here – they’re liberal haters that don’t believe in our vision for a better Arcadia and a brighter future for our children!” Upon hearing Roseanne say this, Dan and DJ, both audience members wearing “Make Arcadia Great Again” caps, attacked Jackie and Darlene, punched them several times, and dragged them out of the arena. As Jackie and Darlene were being attacked, Roseanne yelled to the crowd with a smile: “Don’t hurt ‘em. If I say ‘go get ‘em’ I always seem to get in trouble with the fake news media.”

After the rally, Roseanne was arrested and charged with violating Arcadia’s Anti-Rioting Act. Under the state statute, “a person is guilty of inciting a riot when he or she, through words or actions, urges two or more persons to engage in a riot.” A riot is defined as “a public disturbance involving an assemblage of two or more persons that by tumultuous and violent conduct creates a grave risk of damage or injury to property or person.”

I need your help in determining whether Roseanne might have a viable constitutional defense under the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause to the Anti-Rioting Act charge. Specifically, I’d like you to articulate any reasonable arguments she might have for a First Amendment defense, along with any reasonable arguments Arcadia might make in response.  I do not need you to assess the probability of success on the defense – I’m only interested in learning more about each side’s potential legal arguments. Please do not address any potential legal issues other than the Free Speech claim.

Your submission should follow these guidelines:

• You should base your analysis solely on portions of the constitutional text and case law that we have covered in class up to and including the material covered in Class 23.

• In order to have your analysis reviewed, you must submit an electronic copy of your analysis to your TA sometime before class begins on Thursday, April 11. 

• You must use Times New Roman 12-point font, a one-inch margin on all sides, and double-spacing.

• Your analysis must not exceed 1000 words, you do not need to include a restatement of the underlying facts, and you are not required to Bluebook citations.

• Your analysis should reference any relevant portions of the Constitution and at least two cases we’ve read in class.

• Please state your name at the start of the memo, and you may not consult any materials beyond the Chemerinsky casebook and your class notes.

• You are free to discuss the assignment with any current Constitutional Law II students or your TA, but any written work you submit must be entirely your own. This means you may not consult the written work of other students, you may not review the written work of other students, you may not use Chat GPT or any large language models or generative AI systems, and you may not receive any feedback from anyone on the written work you complete prior to submission.

Thanks for your help, and I look forward to reading your memo!