This State Requires a Free Speech Permit
By Joe Jarvis - January 23, 2018

I won’t pretend that I particularly enjoy impromptu religious sermons in public places. But regardless of my personal feelings, I believe people have the right to free expression, including religion and speech.

But live and let live is apparently not the philosophy of New Jersey cops. When they saw two people preaching on the property of the New Jersey Transit system, they had to step in. The Transit officers said that they asked for the preachers’ identification because they were not behaving like normal commuters.

When the officers asked Karns and Parker for valid identification, neither complied. The officers then arrested the ministers on charges on obstruction for their refusal to show the officers ID. The two preachers were also charged with defiant trespass for preaching without a permit.

Under New Jersey law, “noncommercial” expression on state property requires a permit.

What makes this different from most free speech cases is the arguments that the government used to justify their behavior. You need a permit to preach in public. How do they define preaching? To many, talking politics sounds a lot like preaching.

And why should you need a permit to practice your right to free speech or religion in public? By what standard does the government deny permits? The government can charge money for the privilege of exercising a right.

The charges were dismissed. A cop is supposed to have probable cause when they ask for an ID.

The preachers sued, arguing they were deprived of their right to free expression. They also claimed they were discriminated against on the basis of religion.

But true to form, the New Jersey government closed ranks and doubled down on their position. As a state agency, New Jersey Transit argued that they have immunity from civil claims of rights violations.

Yeah, why should anyone be able to petition the government for a redress of grievances? Their argument is, “We can do whatever we want because we are the government.”

And the worst part is, a U.S. circuit court of appeals agreed with the state of New Jersey. They said state permitting laws trump basic rights like free speech.

Even if the transit officers could be held responsible, the judges decided that the ministers’ rights were never violated.

“Karns and Parker also led the officers to believe that they would remain on the platform despite knowing that they lacked the requisite permit,” the judges wrote. “These facts amply support the officers’ determination of probable cause that Karns and Parker were engaged in criminal trespass.”

So apparently officers don’t have to wait until they suspect a crime has been committed. They can arrest you just for suspecting that a crime will be permitted.

And let’s keep in mind her that the “crime” is free speech.

Luckily there is an easy solution for most of us. Avoid New Jersey, which most sane people do anyway.

And of course, without public land, this would not be an issue. Private property means the owner makes the rules.

You don’t have to play by the rules of the corrupt politicians, manipulative media, and brainwashed peers.

When you subscribe to The Daily Bell, you also get a free guide:

How to Craft a Two Year Plan to Reclaim 3 Specific Freedoms.

This guide will show you exactly how to plan your next two years to build the free life of your dreams. It’s not as hard as you think…

Identify. Plan. Execute.

Yes, deliver THE DAILY BELL to my inbox!


Biggest Currency Reboot in 100 Years?
In less than 3 months, the biggest reboot to the U.S. dollar in 100 years could sweep America.
It has to do with a quiet potential government agreement you’ve never heard about.

Tagged with:
  • Alan777

    Pretty sad state of affairs indeed. The US is descending into a dictatorship on so many levels.

    • Don Duncan

      “…is descending…”? It descended into dictatorship with adoption of the US Constitution, e.g., Alien Act, Sedition Act, Whiskey Tax Act. Can you site one violation of rights by the federal govt. or any of the first 14 presidents with The Articles of Confederation? Does U.S. history even mention much about the USA’s govt. the first decade, before the Constitution?

      • Alan777

        True. However, today the government is in every facet of life and it seems worse.

        • Don Duncan

          It seems worse if, as we age, we become more aware of our delusion. All governments are based on the same politican paradigm, 1. Fraud. 2. Threats. 3. Initiation of violence. But they still depend on public acceptance. If the acceptance begins to waine and tyranny grows, the contrast is more obvious and harder to rationalize. It happened in the USSR and it may be happening here, but it is extremely difficult to assertain the degree from the inside, due to our immersion in the delusion.

  • Libertarian Jerry

    One of the key reasons that America,over the past 100 plus years or so, has slid into a collectivist,socialist,fascist nation is because of the malfeasance,misfeasance and downright un-constitutional and sometimes even illegal actions,decisions and positions of the judges in the Judicial System.

    • Not a dictatorship, but an oligarchy and corporatocracy as well as an out of control government entity !

      • Don Duncan

        Doesn’t the oligarchy dictate?
        When the majority forfeit their political sovereignty what control do they have left?

  • “[B]ecause they have transgressed my covenant, and trespassed against my law … they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind….” (Hosea 8:1,7)

    This is merely another of thousands of whirlwind consequences of Amendment 1, in this instance, its establishment of religion, which is inherently anti-Christian:

    “…Although the First Amendment does not allow for establishing one religion over another, by eliminating Christianity as the federal government’s religion of choice (achieved by Article 6’s interdiction against Christian test oaths), Amendment 1 authorized equality for all non-Christian and even antichristian religions. When the Constitution failed to recognize Christian monotheism, it allowed Amendment 1 to fill the void by authorizing pagan polytheism.

    “Amendment 1 did exactly what the framers proclaimed it could not do: it prohibited the exercise of monotheistic Christianity (except within the confines of its church buildings) and established polytheism in its place. This explains the government’s double standard regarding Christian and non-Christian religions. For example, court participants entering the United States District Court of Appeals for the Middle District of Alabama must walk by a statue of Themis, the Greek goddess of justice. And yet, on November 18, 2002, this very court ruled that Judge Roy Moore’s Ten Commandments Monument violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. Despite many Christians’ protests against this hypocrisy, it was in keeping with the inevitable repercussions of the First Amendment.

    “…Christians hang their religious hat on Amendment 1, as if some great moral principle is carved therein. They have gotten so caught up in the battle over the misuse of the Establishment Clause – the freedom from religion – that they have overlooked the ungodliness intrinsic in the Free Exercise Clause – the freedom of religion….”

    For more, see online Chapter 11 “Amendment 1: Government-Sanctioned Polytheism” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at

    Then find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey at and receive a complimentary copy of a book that examines the Constitution by the Bible.

    • Col. Edward H. R. Green

      “…court participants entering the United States District Court of Appeals for the Middle District of Alabama must walk by a statue of Themis, the Greek goddess of justice.”

      The last time I checked, the US is not ancient Greece the government of which mandated respect and worship of Greek gods and goddesses, the same theocratic government that ordered Socrates to ingest a fatal poison (hemlock) as the penalty for his “impiety”.

      The US Constitution was deliberately composed as a godless, secular constitution that mandated a godless, secular government in order to ensure the people’s individual right to freedom of thought, speech, conscience, and freedom of *and* from religion.

      Since most Americans worship the Christian god, and have since the founding of the USA, and since the founders were educated about the dangers of a union of church and state, they prohibited the government from establishing, i.e. formally sanctioning and enforcing Christianity, or any other religion on the people. They did not want the USA to be any type of theocracy.

      Therefore, it was not hypocritical, but consistent with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution to have Moore’s Ten Commandments monument removed from government property.

      • Col. Green, thanks for responding. However, your second paragraph is indicative that you completely missed the point of my response.

        Nevertheless, thanks for helping make my over-arching point in your two subsequent paragraphs: The Constitution is a biblically incompatible document, despite what most Christians have been bamboozled into believing. In fact, there’s hardly and Article or Amendment that’s not antithetical, if not seditious, to Yahweh’s sovereignty and morality.

        For evidence, see free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective,” in which every Article and Amendment is *examined* by the Bible, at

      • r2bzjudge

        “…court participants entering the United States District Court of
        Appeals for the Middle District of Alabama must walk by a statue of
        Themis, the Greek goddess of justice.”

        “The last time I checked,
        the US is not ancient Greece the government of which mandated respect and worship of Greek gods and goddesses, the same theocratic government that ordered Socrates to ingest a fatal poison (hemlock) as the penalty for his “impiety”.”

        Last time i checked Moses and Jesus were not Americans, any more than Themis. A godess is an establishment of religion, yet it is allowed to remain on government property?

    • The principles of the Bill of Rights is based on the natural rights people have as individual humans, and that’s according to the language therein as well as the signers’ own writings.

      Now a couple of them are liars, thieves and vipers, no doubt –like Hamilton– but that is the language in the Amendments themselves.

      Generally, they have to do with recognizing that no government (or person) has the right to initiate force or threat of force against you to limit your rights.

      The thing is, Christians are the most hated by statists, eventually, even in post-Christian cultures like in the US, because they are the hardest to tame. There are always some who preserve a loyalty to God over a secular god. That’s why all the usual SJW’s howled and groaned when Danforth told the Liberty College audience “WE HAVE NO KING BUT JESUS!”

      That’s what the earliest Christians understood Jesus to mean by “rendering”!

      • Trutherator, thanks for your input.

        Hopefully, you’ll agree that there’s only one standard by which everything (including the Constitution) is to be ethically evaluated: By Yahweh’s unchanging morality as reflected in His Ten Commandments and their respective statues and judgments. When the Constitution (including the Bill of Rights) is actually examined by this standard (instead of a bunch of dead politicians’ cherry-picked quotations), it’s found to be anything but biblically compatible. In fact, there’s hardly an Article or Amendment that’s not antithetical, if not seditious, to Yahweh’s sovereignty and morality.

        For evidence, see free online book “Bible Law vs. Constitution: The Christian Perspective,” in which every Article and Amendment is examined by the Bible, at

        Then, find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the right-hand sidebar and receive a complimentary copy of the 85-page “Primer” of “BL vs. USC.”

        • I read enough to react herein.

          I do NOT regard the Constitution as granting me any rights at all. That’s the point of my comment, which still stands, generally. For example, the first amendment does not grant a right but recognizes the right of men to speak about anything, especially against the sins of governments of this world. The 2nd also recognizes in its language your right to defend your family against physical attacks by bad guys, what your link article calls your right to defend your family.

          The Bible in fact condemns force of any kind initiated against another’s person or body or property. That includes “government”s. It is seen from the language of the Bill of Rights that it is written in that sense.

          • America was sold down the river when the 18th-century founding fathers replaced Biblical responsibilities with Enlightenment rights.

            See blog article “America’s Road to Hell: Paved With Rights” at

            Then “Rights: Man’s Sacrilegious Claim
            to Divinity” at

          • You totally misunderstand me. Instead of assuming what I think between the lines you should JUST ASK. Like Jordan Peterson points out, most people have the problem of just not listening.

            Most people are indeed on their way to hell, because wide is the way and broad is the gate, and many go in thereat.

            Democracy and Government are two false gods that people will follow to destruction, and my point was that the same principle applies to people that trust the Bill of Rights instead of the One True God that enshrines the rights of man in the Creation itself.

            There are individual rights listed, not granted, in the Bill of Rights, that are granted by God. As such, we can demand they be respected. It’s true though that the very fact they are included in a document that formalized the rules of government for a new federation of independent states, mitigates against those recognized rights.

            We are God-authorized to expect, demand, of every single person respect for those rights.

            They are summarized in the Confucian version: Don’t do anything to anybody you don’t want done to you.

            What is demanded of Christians is the Jesus version of the second greatest commandment: Do unto others as you would have them done unto you. (The original text,

          • There are two inherent problems with the entire concept of God-given Constitutional rights: 1) Except *perhaps* as the document’s timekeeper in Article 7, the Constitution knows nothing of God, Christ, or HIs moral law, and 2) God and His Word know nothing of optional rights. Instead, the Bible is replete with God-expected responsibilities:

            “…In ‘Understanding the Constitution: Ten Things Every Christian Should Know About the Supreme Law of the Land,’ David Gibbs, Jr., and David Gibbs III argue for unalienable rights:

            ‘Our rights come from God, not from the state. Therefore, the state cannot take them away. What Uncle Sam gives, Uncle Sam can take away. But our nation’s birth certificate, the Declaration of Independence makes clear that our rights are unalienable because they come from God.’6

            “This sounds wonderful, but is it true? The State has certainly taken away an unwanted infant’s right to life. The State has incrementally taken away gun owners’ Second Amendment rights. The State has taken away the right to happiness, in particular the right to own property. Because rights come from the State, the State can take them away at its pleasure. On the other hand, as pointed out in Chapter 11, Yahweh’s law does not recognize rights, God-given or otherwise, but only God-required responsibilities….

            “The theory of unalienable or natural rights can be traced back to the Age of Enlightenment. The term “natural rights,” as employed by 18th-century men, is not compatible with the Bible. Deuteronomy 28 does not say we have a natural, human, or civil right to anything. Rather, we must serve Yahweh as God in order to receive His blessings….

            “Instead of endowing us with rights, Yahweh expects righteousness from us. People who demand their rights
            are like children, focused only on themselves. People who pursue righteousness are focused on Yahweh and their fellow man. The former person promotes a government of, by, and for the people; the latter person promotes a government of, by, and for Yahweh….”

            For more, see Chapter 18 “Amendment 9: Rights vs. Righteousness” of free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at

            Then blog article “America’s Road to Hell: Paved With Rights” at

            Followed by “Rights: Man’s Sacrilegious Claim
            to Divinity.”

          • You still miss it. Right that Constitution is not self enforcing duh much less the Bill of Rights. And right, God’s laws for his followers is much harder and easier bcs. the Laws of Love. World’s governments are so wicked. You have a right to speak, to assemble, to refuse to support sodomites’ sins. According to God’s laws, these are crimes.

            Bill of Rights *generally* not perfectly recognizes those rights as independent of the Constitution or government. It does not mention God but I never said it did. Repeat: I never said it did. You seem to think I did. Anyway, those listed rights are recognized by God, a couple of them in the 10 Commandments.

            The time during the book of Judges there was no government. Then the people demanded a king, blamed their demand on Samuel’ s son’s. Samuel gave them God’s warning against having a government. Result: first king a disaster, the second idly, and downhill wickedness after.

    • That said, the US now has a pagan ruling class.

      • Christopher Snittle

        The USA and all world governments have always had the same CEO in history.

        Luke 4: 5 So Satan brought him up and showed him all the kingdoms of the inhabited earth in an instant of time. 6 Then the Devil said to him: “I will give you all this authority and their glory, because it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. 7 If you, therefore, do an act of worship before me, it will all be yours.

        You’re pumping from a dry well thinking you can ever make it work.

        Don’t worry, the landlord is fixing to evict: Daniel 2:44

  • gregory alan johnson

    All municipal corporations, except by contract, are unconstitutional and cannot be an authority of governance.
    I’ll take YHVH’s Torah instead, in the name of Yeshua.

    • Jehovah.

      • gregory alan johnson

        There are no “J”s in Hebrew, nor are there any in the 1611 “Authorized”.

        • The KJB is written in English. That’s my language. And read as Jehovah with a J, the English language translation from the Hebrew. And Jesus is the correct spelling for the English-language name for the Jewish Messiah.

          • gregory alan johnson

            I’m no fan of the English language, despite it being my “native tongue”, and even less of the KJB that was James’ answer to the Geneva, which is my preferred Bible.

        • The Psalms also point out that God has placed his Word above “all thy name”.

        • Christopher Snittle

          Which mean you don’t know how it was exactly said. Jayhovah, Yehovah, ect. Bobbee, Bobay, who cares. We know that it was pronounced this was as far back as the 11th century. Additionally, no one seems to have an qualms about Jeremiah, Joshua, Joel, Job, ect. so your point is nonsense. The point is our creator has a personalized name.

  • Don Duncan

    “The govt. can charge money for the privilege of exercising a right.”
    Joe, you forgot a very important question mark. The SCOTUS has ruled rights don’t require permits but who is enforcing their decisions? Certainly not the legislative or executive branch of state or federal govt. They do the opposite when they pass unConstitutional acts and enforce them. And when someone wants justice they have to ask the courts to remind the law makers and enforcers of their irresponsible, illegal actions, after paying hundreds of thousands in court fees and waiting years. I am reminded of a Chief Justice who said, “Justice delayed, is justice denied.” He should have added “justice for only the rich is not equality under the law.”
    Add to this a valid appeal may be turned down by a justice’s clerk, not technically, but in practice. I speak from experience.
    Why is there no personal penalty for making and enforcing invalid law? Citizens suffer while the people paid to know what is Constitutional violate rights and the Constitution and get reelected or remain employed without sanction. Why? There is no practical process for making them do their job. It’s as if they are excempt from the law, logic, and morality. Moreover, they tell us this is “law & order”. I call it “rule & chaos”. But then I use logical observation and exempt no one, even the minor gods who most worship. For this I am vilified as a libertarian anarchist. This is how the superstition of authoritarianism is defended by the faithful.

    • A libertarian anarchist is something to be..
      Workingmen who are the same are in a true sense free..

  • r2bzjudge

    “Under New Jersey law, “noncommercial” expression on state property requires a permit.”

    A permit is required to say hello to someone on New Jersey state property?

  • Wade House

    Religion and Censorship go together here. Unsubscribed

  • Samarami

    Free individuals should recognize: “their” property (that purporting to belong to “states”, or “cities”, or other collectivist outfits) is not “our” property.

  • Christopher Snittle

    Like some other violations, it has to go to the supreme court to be ironed out. So sad.