Key Takeaways
- Streets, sidewalks, and public parks are traditional public forums, where your First Amendment rights to speak, assemble, and protest are at their strongest.
- A permit can allow a large march to lawfully fill and block streets, as the 2017 Women's March in Washington did with no reported arrests.
- Without a permit, you can still protest in public places, but you generally cannot intentionally obstruct traffic or block others from using sidewalks and paths.
In January 2017, the Women's March brought downtown Washington, D.C. to a standstill, and satellite marches shut down traffic in cities across the country. Were those marchers within their rights? And could you do the same next weekend with a couple hundred friends?
In this TalksOnLaw Brief, Lee Rowland, Executive Director of the National Coalition Against Censorship and a veteran First Amendment attorney, explains the rights you have to protest on streets, sidewalks, and in parks, and the limits that come with them.
Public Forums: Where Speech Rights Are Strongest
Rowland explains that courts have identified certain places, called public forums, where First Amendment rights are at their most robust. The three classic examples are streets, sidewalks, and public parks. In those spaces, she says, you have a lot of rights to engage in speech, association, and protest. But you can have even more rights when you have a permit, including the right to block the streets.
The Power of a Permit
The Women's March, Rowland notes, is a strong example. Hundreds of thousands of people flooded the streets, and it was nearly impossible to drive anywhere in downtown D.C. that day, yet no protesters were reported arrested. That was lawful, she explains, because the organizers worked with local authorities in advance and obtained permits to do exactly what the images showed: fill the streets.
The Big Asterisk: Intentional Obstruction
Going out without a permit is more complicated. As a general rule, Rowland says, the First Amendment lets you protest on streets, sidewalks, and in parks, but without a permit you cannot engage in intentional obstruction, which simply means getting in the way. In the street, you cannot deliberately step in front of cars. On a sidewalk, you cannot force pedestrians into the road. In a park, you must leave paths open for others. Her practical guidance: protest on sidewalks one or two people deep, stay to the side of the roadway if you march, and keep park paths clear.
What to Know Now
These principles remain the foundation of protest law. Governments may impose reasonable time, place, and manner rules that are content neutral, narrowly tailored, and leave open other ways to communicate, as the Supreme Court held in Ward v. Rock Against Racism. The Court reaffirmed in McCullen v. Coakley (2014) that public sidewalks hold a special place for speech. Permit systems cannot give officials unlimited discretion, and fees cannot be raised because a message is unpopular, under Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement.
Since this Brief was published, protest rules have stayed in the news. Courts reviewing security plans and march routes around the 2024 political conventions largely upheld them as reasonable time, place, and manner limits. A growing number of states have adopted or revived laws restricting face coverings at protests, and some have increased penalties for blocking roads or for conduct during riots; supporters cite public safety, while civil liberties groups warn of chilling lawful protest, and challenges continue. The practical lesson Rowland offers still applies: when a large group wants to take over a street, a permit makes the difference.
