Secret Service Intervention Fails as Federal Judge Rejects Claims About a Specific Political Protest Banner
A free speech win?
A federal judge just handed a major victory to free speech advocates by blocking the National Park Service from interfering with a protest group’s “86-47” flag near the National Mall. U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss ruled that the banner, which critics claimed was a veiled threat against Donald Trump, is actually a call for his impeachment and removal from office. The decision is a direct rebuke to the Secret Service and Department of Justice, which argued the phrase could incite violence.
According to Politico, the case centers on Accountability Now USA, a liberal organization that’s been protesting Trump for months outside the federal courthouse on Constitution Avenue. The group’s “86-47” flag became a flashpoint after Secret Service agents visited the protest on May 12 and questioned volunteers about its meaning.
According to court filings, the volunteers made it clear they wanted Trump out of office but explicitly said they didn’t wish him physical harm. One volunteer even told agents, “I want Trump to live forever and rot in jail where he belongs.”
Judge Moss didn’t buy the government’s argument that the phrase was a coded threat
In his ruling, he pointed to the Merriam-Webster definition of “eighty-six,” which traces back to 1930s soda-counter slang meaning “to throw out” or “to get rid of.” While the dictionary acknowledges that some people use the term to mean “to kill,” it doesn’t include that definition in its official entry because of its “relative recency and sparseness of use.”
Moss wrote that the context of the flag, displayed during an impeachment protest outside a courthouse, made it clear the group was advocating for Trump’s removal, not violence. This ruling is especially awkward for the Justice Department, which is currently prosecuting former FBI Director James Comey for posting a similar “86 47” message on Instagram last year. Comey’s post featured seashells arranged in the numbers “86 47” on a North Carolina beach.
After backlash, he took it down and apologized, saying he wasn’t aware the phrase could be linked to violence. According to ABC News, his trial is set to begin October 21, and this decision could complicate the government’s case. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has argued that Comey’s post crossed the line into prosecutable speech, but Moss’ ruling suggests the phrase itself isn’t inherently threatening.
The Secret Service has doubled down on its concerns
This comes after an armed man was shot dead by law enforcement near the White House on May 24. In a declaration submitted to the court, Secret Service Deputy Director Matthew Quinn warned that “86 47” could be perceived as a threat in the current climate.
“Such conduct will be investigated appropriately by the Secret Service to determine its potential to result in an act of violence,” Quinn wrote. But Moss wasn’t convinced, writing that the First Amendment doesn’t allow the government to censor political speech just because a phrase might have violent connotations in some contexts.
This isn’t the first time Accountability Now USA has clashed with authorities over its protests. In April, the Park Service sent the group an email alleging that some of its signs – including one that read “Trump r***d little girls” – contained “obscenity” not protected by the First Amendment.
The group temporarily removed the signs before suing, and Moss’ ruling didn’t address whether they meet the legal definition of obscenity. The case is a reminder of how fraught political speech has become, especially when it involves high-profile figures like Trump.
Trump’s ties to Jeffrey Epstein have been a recurring theme in the group’s protests
The president has acknowledged knowing Epstein but insists he cut ties with him before Epstein’s legal troubles began. The federal government’s files on Epstein include some allegations against Trump, but authorities have dismissed them as not credible. Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing related to Epstein’s crimes.
For now, the “86-47” flag will stay up, at least until Moss’ two-week restraining order expires. The judge’s decision underscores how tricky it is to balance free speech with public safety, especially when a phrase can have multiple meanings.
If you’ve been following the Comey case, this ruling might make you wonder how the Justice Department plans to prove its case when a federal judge has already said the phrase isn’t inherently threatening. One thing’s for sure: this debate is far from over. The Secret Service and Justice Department will likely keep a close eye on how “86-47” is used in protests, but for now, the courts have drawn a line in the sand.
(Featured image: pom’.)
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
Follow The Mary Sue:
