[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 1, Chapters 1 - 6]
[Chapter 4.  House Facilities and Capitol Grounds]
[A. Introductory]
[Â§ 2. Demonstrations and Disturbances]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 272-273]
 
                               CHAPTER 4
 
                  House Facilities and Capitol Grounds
 
                            A. INTRODUCTORY
 
Sec. 2. Demonstrations and Disturbances

    Federal statutory provisions(5) make violent, disorderly 
or disruptive acts in the Capitol building or on the Capitol grounds 
unlawful, as well as prohibiting all unauthorized demonstrations. The 
unauthorized possession or use on the Capitol grounds of any firearm, 
dangerous weapon, explosive, or incendiary device is 
unlawful.(6) The unauthorized presence of any person or any 
group of persons upon the floor or in the gallery of either House of 
Congress is a violation of federal statutory law, as is unauthorized 
presence in any room within any of the Capitol buildings set aside or 
designated for the use of either House of Congress or any Member, 
committee, subcommittee, officer, or employee of either House of 
Congress, with the intent to disrupt the orderly conduct of official 
business.(7) It is also unlawful to willfully and knowingly 
utter abusive language at any place upon the Capitol grounds with the 
intent to disturb the orderly conduct of any session of either House of 
Congress, including committee or subcommittee hearings; to impede 
passage through or within the Capitol grounds or Capitol buildings; to 
engage in any act of physical violence upon the Capitol grounds or 
within any of the Capitol buildings; or to parade, demonstrate, or 
picket within any of the Capitol buildings.(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 40 USC Sec. Sec. 193f and 193g (1970).
 6. 40 USC Sec. 193f(a)(1) (1970).
 7. 40 USC Sec. 193f(b)(1)-(3) (1970).
 8. 40 USC Sec. 193f(b)(4)-(7) (1970).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Nov. 6, 1972,(9) the Supreme Court ruled that section 
193g of title 40 unconstitutionally abridges the first amendment right 
to assemble and petition the government. Section 193g provides:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. Chief of Capitol Police v Jeannette Rankin Brigade, 409 U.S. 972 
        (Nov. 6, 1972).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        It is forbidden to parade, stand, or move in processions or 
    assemblages in said United States Capitol Grounds, or to display 
    therein any flag, banner, or device designed or adapted to bring 
    into public notice any party, organization, or movement, except as 
    hereinafter provided in sections 193j and 193k of this title.

Sections 193j and 193k provide that on ``proper occasions'' the 
prohibitions contained in sections 193b-193g may be suspended by the 
President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House, or in their 
absence by the Capitol Police Board.

    The Jeannette Rankin Brigade, a coalition of women against the

[[Page 273]]

war in Vietnam, and 58 individual women filed a complaint in the United 
States District Court for the District of Columbia on Jan. 8, 1968, 
following the refusal by the Capitol Police Board to permit them to 
carry out a planned march on the Capitol grounds to protest the war. 
The three-judge court balanced the plaintiffs' right to assemble and 
petition the government under the First Amendment against the interests 
of maintaining the serenity of the Capitol grounds and concluded:

        While some substantial governmental interests in the Capitol 
    Grounds may warrant protection, none have been alleged which are 
    sufficiently substantial to override the fundamental right to 
    petition ``in its classic form'' and to justify a blanket 
    prohibition of all assemblies, no matter how peaceful and orderly, 
    anywhere on the Capitol Grounds.(10)

10. Jeannette Rankin Brigade v Chief of Capitol Police, 342 F Supp 575, 
        585 (D.D.C. 1972).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The court refused to rewrite the provision to make it consistent 
with the First Amendment rights of the plaintiffs, stating that under 
the concepts embodied in the separation of powers doctrine, such a 
function is more appropriately to be performed by 
Congress.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 342 F SUPP at 587.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The defendants took a direct appeal from the decision of the 
District Court to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, acting without 
a hearing and with no written opinion, affirmed the decision of the 
District Court holding section 193g to be 
unconstitutional.(12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Chief of Capitol Police v Jeannette Rankin Brigade, 409 U.S. 972 
        (Nov. 6, 1972).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Mar. 1, 1954,(13) an extraordinary incident occurred 
in the House Chamber. A discharge of firearms from the House Gallery 
interrupted the counting of a division vote on a resolution relating to 
the supplying of agricultural workers from Mexico. Four Puerto Rican 
terrorists in Gallery Eleven fired an estimated 20 to 30 pistol shots 
downward into the crowd of Members on the floor. Five Members were 
wounded. All five of the wounded Members were discharged from the 
hospitals by the end of May, 1954.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 100 Cong. Rec. 2434, 83d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The four assailants were identified by police as belonging to the 
Puerto Rican Nationalist Party. They were brought to trial in the U.S. 
District Court for the District of Columbia. Three of the four were 
sentenced to serve a total of from 25 to 75 years in prison, while the 
fourth was sentenced to serve from 16 years and months to 50 Years.

[[Page 274]]