He would have had a *mixed *audience, and the ones who were there to bask in his Drumpfiness would have had their experience marred by the ones who were there to denounce him.
I doubt a political rally could be described as “government business or official function” and have this law apply but IANAL.
So when is Joe Wilson going to get arrested for that time he disrupted the State of the Union?
Well, yes, perhaps they would have. I’m not sure that freedom of speech includes freedom to have an unmarred basking experience.
When he does it again, I guess, because he interrupted Obama 2 years before the cited law was passed.
I personally find the idea that anyone can be made to leave for whatever reason you want at a public political event to be troubling. That should be the very place where freedom of speech and freedom of assembly apply.
Sure, you can kick 'em out for doing something that would be bad no matter what their message. But not for their message. Not just any reason–it needs to be a non-speech-based reason.
People will sometimes say I don’t believe in freedom of speech because I don’t treat it as some big moral thing. But I do–I just think its primary purpose is for political speech, and you can’t get much more political than this.
Plus, if Trump had a good enough message, he wouldn’t need to kick out the people who disagreed. Kick 'em out for bad behavior, but not for their ideas.
In any event, Trump says nobody’s been injured at any of his rallies, so I guess we can all stop wringing our hands about all of it since it never happened. 
I’m finally getting it! Trump is a basking shark.
People disrupting the Trump rallies make me realize that my side can be dicks too.
Now, the obvious thing that is going to happen is that Trump fans will disrupt Clinton and Sanders rallies. If you go to a rally, sit the fuck down and listen. If you don’t like what you hear, then make counter arguments at an appropriate time. Shouting down speech that you disagree with is how my four year old tries to make his point.
(This doesn’t mean that violence should be encouraged, but I have no problem with security having protesters on a short leash, and having them thrown out.)
So we’re not allowed to boo anymore?
If the booing is short and is intended to indicate disagreement, and not simply to drown out someone else’s speech, it’s fine. If it allows the speaker to continue afterwards, it’s fine.
Is that what’s happening at Trump rallies, just booing?
Nothing happened at Trump’s rally in Chicago. I know at least one of the organizers talked about having hundreds of people walk on to the stage simultaneously, in order to overwhelm security. Would they have allowed Trump to continue speaking while they were on stage, or would they have tried to drown out his voice with their own? I don’t know.
At no event has Trump’s amplified voice been in any danger of actually being drowned out by protesters.
If protesters are sitting silently, even if they are obviously protesters, they should be left the fuck alone. One side being a dick does not preclude another side from also being a dick. In this case there’s enough diskish behavior to go around.
A Jewish candidate has brownshirts?
That’s a problem of anyone who gets charged. Define “is” or “wipe” precisely and legally. In a courtroom do those word games actually work?
That’s ridiculous. If it is a place open to the general public at that time sure. But if an area was rented and access is controlled and granted conditionally you can be tossed out for a variety of reasons.
You think SDMB should not be moderated? It’s only speech.
1752.Restricted building or grounds
(a)Whoever—
(1)knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
(2)knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
(3)knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; or
(4)knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds; or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
(b)The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is—
(1)a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if—
(A)the person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm; or
(B)the offense results in significant bodily injury as defined by section 2118(e)(3); and
(2)a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.
(c)In this section—
(1)the term restricted buildings or grounds means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area—
(A)of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds;
**
(B)of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or**
(C)of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and
(2)the term other person protected by the Secret Service means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.
Yeah, I read it. My point stands.
No it does not. “the term restricted buildings or grounds means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area…—a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting”
This clearly applies to the rallies of any candidate under secret service protection, including Trump.
Rest assured that, if this were Trump supporters shutting down a Sanders rally, this board and the media chorus would be howling for the maximum penalty for everyone who disrupted or conspired to disrupt the event. And they would be right.