Editing Free speech zone (section)

==Criticisms==
[[Image:First amendment area Muir Woods.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|A "First Amendment Area" at the [[Muir Woods National Monument]].]]

[[Civil liberties]] advocates argue that free speech zones are used as a form of censorship and [[public relations]] management to conceal the existence of popular opposition from the mass public and elected officials.<ref name="ACLU">[https://www.aclu.org/freespeech/protest/11423prs20030923.html Secret Service Ordered Local Police to Restrict Anti-Bush Protesters at Rallies, ACLU Charges in Unprecedented Nationwide Lawsuit]. ACLU press release, September 23, 2003</ref> There is much controversy surrounding the creation of these areas&nbsp;– the mere existence of such zones is offensive to some people, who maintain that the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution]] makes the entire country an unrestricted free speech zone.<ref name="ACLU"/> The [[Department of Homeland Security]] "has even gone so far as to tell local police departments to regard critics of the [[War on Terrorism]] as potential [[Terrorism|terrorists]] themselves."<ref name="sfgate"/><ref>Cline, Austin. [http://atheism.about.com/b/a/051951.htm "Free Speech" Zones] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060425203124/http://atheism.about.com/b/a/051951.htm |date=April 25, 2006 }}. [[About.com]], December 24, 2003. Retrieved on December 20, 2006</ref>

The Bush administration has been criticized by columnist [[James Bovard]] of ''The American Conservative'' for requiring protesters to stay within a designated area, while allowing supporters access to more areas.<ref name="amconmag"/> According to the ''[[Chicago Tribune]]'', the American Civil Liberties Union has asked a federal court in Washington, D.C. to prevent the Secret Service from keeping anti-Bush protesters distant from presidential appearances while allowing supporters to display their messages up close, where they are likely to be seen by the news media.<ref name="amconmag"/>

The preliminary plan for the [[2004 Democratic National Convention]] was criticized by the [[National Lawyers Guild]] and the ACLU of Massachusetts as being insufficient to handle the size of the expected protest. "The zone would hold as few as 400 of the several thousand protesters who are expected in Boston in late July."<ref>Klein, Rick. [https://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/02/20/convention_plan_puts_protesters_blocks_away?mode=PF Convention plan puts protesters blocks away]. The ''[[Boston Globe]]'', February 20, 2004. Retrieved on December 20, 2006.</ref>