Here is the link: http://www.boston.com/Boston/metrodesk/2011/11/occupy-boston-face-off-against-menino-administration-courtroom-today/PHTNf1ZmtDtzKVYti6DRlL/index.html
The basis appears to be that the standard for irreparable harm (potentially) was met, as well as the 1st Amendment threshold. Exceptions allowing emergency dismantling of the Occupy Boston encampment were spelled out. Also, the judge ordered the parties into mediation over some objections from the City of Boston’s attorneys. Frankly, requiring those involved, both attorneys and administrators to sit down and talk with one another makes a whole lot of sense to me.
My personal thanks to the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) and NLG (National Lawyers Guild) for supplying expect legal services in the field of 1st Amendment law and ensuring access to justice for the infant Occupy movement. Folks saying “why hasn’t Occupy solved” (name a problem) seem to forget how young a movement and how early in its evolution this movement is, having just hit the two month old mark.
I would hope those in Occupy working groups and supporting occupy remember that. It appears Judge McIntyre understands this, and how this is playing out really does show the importance of access to justice, once again, for social equity and progress.
There is a next court date, too, on Decemb er 1, 2011 so that Judge McIntyre can manage and monitor how the process is working.
All the legal pleading are here, including the Affidavits, which should make EB3 happy, and others as well: http://aclum.org/occupy_legal
So far, this is a victory for both common sense and the rule of law.
I think the First Amendment issues here are trickier than they look, because I don’t really see how the tent city is integral to the protesters’ message. They say that the tent city is symbolic of “the possibility to create a more democratic, just, and economically egalitarian society”, but if that’s so, isn’t it so just because the Occupy folks believe in those things and have built a tent city? I guess the argument seems somewhat circular to me. But I’m not a specialist in this stuff and don’t have a firm view on it.
On the other hand, even if the city could permissibly evict the protesters, I don’t see why it should want to.