Back to Overview of Report

Previous Section: Overview of the fundamental right to protest

In some cases, government can require a permit as a condition of protest on public property. For example, government often can require a permit for parades in the streets, given the impact on vehicle traffic. Likewise, government often can require a permit for large protests in public parks and plazas, in order to ensure fairness among the various groups seeking to use the site.

On the other hand, the First Amendment generally bars government from requiring a permit when one person or a small group protest in a park, or when a group of any size protest on a public sidewalk in a manner that does not burden pedestrian or vehicle traffic. Such non-permitted protests might involve speeches, press conferences, signs, marches, chants, leaflets, expressive clothing, and efforts to speak with passersby. The absence of a permit for such protests simply does not burden any legitimate government interests. Thus, the Chicago Park District does not require a permit for gatherings in parks of fewer than 50 people. Likewise, the Chicago ordinance regulating public assembly does not require a permit for gatherings and marches on sidewalks that do not obstruct the normal flow of pedestrian traffic.

Moreover, if protesters gather in response to breaking news, the First Amendment requires an exception from the ordinary deadlines in the government’s permit process. Thus, in the Chicago ordinance requiring permit applications 15 days before a parade, and notice to the City five days before a sidewalk demonstration that would impede pedestrian traffic, there is an exemption for spontaneous responses to current events.

The First Amendment limits the kinds of permit fees and other financial burdens that government can impose on protesters. First, the charges cannot exceed the actual cost to government to regulate speech in the site. Second, government cannot charge protesters more when additional police are needed to control opponents of the protesters – that would be a kind of a “heckler’s veto.” Third, government cannot use an insurance requirement to bar a protest by a group that unsuccessfully attempted to obtain insurance. Fourth, there must be an exception for groups that cannot afford to pay the charges. For example, in the Chicago ordinance requiring certain parade organizers to obtain $1,000,000 in insurance, there is an exception where this would be “so financially burdensome that it would preclude” the application.

When Chicago law requires a permit to protest, and the First Amendment does not excuse the absence of a permit, protesters without a permit might be arrested or prosecuted.

Next Section: When else can government regulate the time, place, and manner of protest?

Back to Overview of Report

Back to Overview of Report

Previous Section: When else can government regulate the time, place, and manner of protest?

Civil disobedience is the refusal to comply with certain laws as a form of protest. Often these are valid laws, such as a prohibition on obstructing ingress or egress to a building. The First Amendment generally does not protect such acts.

When a crowd of protesters is in a place that police believe the crowd cannot lawfully be, the police must carefully distinguish between those protesters who intend to be arrested for civil disobedience, and those protesters who do not know their presence is unlawful. The best police practice is individualized commands to leave on threat of arrest, followed by a realistic opportunity to leave. Thus, during the spontaneous anti-war mass march in Chicago at the start of the Iraq War in 2003, it was unlawful for police to arrest 900 people on Chicago Avenue without first notifying them that they must disperse or be arrested.

An Illinois statute and a Chicago ordinance prohibit resisting arrest. The former has been applied to “going limp” during arrest. The latter specifically prohibits passive resistance to arrest, as well as active resistance. Thus, a person who commits civil disobedience, and then goes limp during arrest, might face charges both for their initial act of civil disobedience, and also for resisting arrest. On the other hand, mere argument with a police officer about the validity of an arrest, without some physical act which impedes the arrest, does not amount to resisting arrest.

Next Section: What should I do if police stop or arrest me?

Back to Overview of Report

Back to Overview of Report

Previous Section: When can Chicago police spy on protesters?

The public locations most commonly used for protest in Chicago are owned by different government agencies, and thus have different rules and permit processes. They also enjoy different levels of First Amendment protection, depending upon whether they are “traditional public forums” entitled to the most protection, or other kinds of forums entitled to less protection. Immediately below is a list of these locations, and a brief description of their level of First Amendment protection, along with their owners, rules, and permit processes.

VII. A. Parades in the streets

To hold a parade in Chicago’s streets, protesters must submit a permit application to the City’s Department of Transportation. If the Department denies a parade permit, or grants a modified permit (for example, along a different route than requested), then the applicant can appeal to the City’s Department of Administrative Hearings, and to a judge. For downtown parades, and large parades anticipated to cost more than $20,000 in City services, the applicant must obtain $1,000,000 in insurance, though there is an exception where this amount would be “so financially burdensome that it would preclude” the application.

VII. B. Protest on the sidewalks

Many Chicagoans use the public sidewalks throughout our City as a site for myriad protest activities, including speeches, press conferences, display of signs, marches, leafleting, and attempting to speak with passersby. If such sidewalk protests do not obstruct the normal flow of pedestrian traffic, then the City ordinance does not require a permit. If a sidewalk assembly will burden pedestrian traffic, the ordinance requires five-day notice to the Department of Transportation.

Unfortunately, the U.S. and Illinois Constitutions do not protect protest on sidewalks on private property.

VII. C. Daley Plaza

Daley Plaza in downtown Chicago, owned by the City of Chicago, is a public forum enjoying great First Amendment protection. Daley Plaza is operated by the Chicago Public Building Commission, which has issued rules for using Daley Plaza, and a permit application process.

VII. D. The Thompson Center Plaza

The plaza next to the James R. Thompson Center in downtown Chicago, owned by the State of Illinois, is a public forum enjoying great First Amendment protection. The Thompson Center Plaza is operated by Illinois Central Management Services, which has issued rules for using the Thompson Center plaza, and a permit application process.

VII. E. The Federal Plaza

The plaza next to the federal Kluczynski Building and Loop Post Office, owned by the U.S. government, is a public forum enjoying great First Amendment protection. The Federal Plaza is operated by the federal General Services Administration, which has issued rules for public properties like the Federal Plaza, and a permit application process.

VII. F. Grant Park

Grant Park, located between Chicago’s downtown and Lake Michigan, is a public forum enjoying great First Amendment protection. It is owned by the Chicago Park District, which has issued rules regarding the use of Grant Park and other parks, and a permit application process.

VII. G. Millennium Park

Millennium Park, located in Chicago’s downtown at the northwest corner of Grant Park, is operated by the City’s Department of Cultural Affairs and Special Events. The City allows leafleting and begging in Millennium Park. While courts have not addressed whether the First Amendment protects rallies and picketing in Millennium Park, the better view is that it does.

VII. H. McCormick Place

McCormick Place, one of the nation’s largest convention centers, is located on Lake Michigan just south of downtown. It is owned and operated by a government agency known as the Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority. The MPEA allows leafleting at doors into McCormick Place, and rallies and picketing at two sites near the convention center.

VII. I. Navy Pier and Polk Bros Park

Navy Pier is located on Lake Michigan just north of Chicago’s downtown, and Polk Bros Park (formerly Gateway Park) is located immediately to the west of Navy Pier. On Navy Pier, the First Amendment protects the right to leaflet, but not the right to protest in a group. In Polk Bros Park, the First Amendment protects both. The MPEA owns both areas, and has issued rules and a permit process for them. The courts are now considering whether a special feature of Gateway Park – it is a small area through which all foot traffic to Navy Pier must pass – means that the MPEA can require a permit for protests by one person or by a small group of people.

VII. J. O’Hare and Midway Airports

The O’Hare and Midway airports are operated by the Chicago Department of Aviation. At both airports, there are sites for leafleting inside the terminals, and sites for small demonstrations on the abutting sidewalks. The Department of Aviation has created a permit application process and rules for these protest sites.

Back to Overview of Report