First Amendment has limits

Editor,

During the student protests regarding the Gaza conflict a group of Stanford students occupy a building, barricade themselves in and do $300,000 worth of damage. The District Attorney tries them for vandalism and somehow a few jurors believe the defense’s argument that their actions were protected by the First Amendment. He probably harkened back to the Boston Tea Party. I guess if it’s not your property being destroyed it’s somehow OK. Unfortunately, this will embolden others to commit similar acts in the name of their cause. Certainly the right to protest is a basic American right, but I don’t remember anywhere in the First Amendment where it includes the destruction of private property. Destructive actions should have consequences. I suspect these jurors purposely lied when asked about their ability to be objective in order to support the accused. Fortunately the DA is also mystified by the mistrial and plans to retry the group. Let’s hope he does a better job with his selection of the jury.