A group of protesters arrested for chanting loudly about homeless rights at a Gresham City Council meeting are free to chant another day.

A judge last week threw out criminal charges against the group, saying that convicting them under Oregon's second-degree disorderly conduct law would violate their constitutionally protected right to free speech.

The decision came just as dozens of protesters were arrested under the same law after taking to Portland streets to decry the election of Donald Trump as president. The judge's ruling, however, shouldn't have any effect on their cases because it addresses a different part of the law, narrowly focusing on gatherings such as public meetings.

Still in Portland, where protests are a way of life, the ruling is significant because it could hinder the ability of police and prosecutors to clamp down on protesters who disrupt government meetings.

In Gresham, the scene at the City Council meeting unfolded March 15, as a few dozen protesters brought the meeting to a halt by standing in front of the City Council and loudly voicing their frustrations. They chanted "Two, four, six, eight! We need shelter, not more hate!"

A short while earlier, some members of the group had testified before the council saying they thought Gresham was trying to push homeless people out of the city limits -- in part by sweeping the Springwater Corridor of homeless campers.

Defense attorney Thomas Freedman, who represented one of seven protesters who were arrested, said the demonstrators felt as if council members weren't listening to them and so created a de facto filibuster by chanting. A video of the meeting shows police eventually moving in and picking people from the group one by one, handcuffing them and taking them off.

Freedman said he was surprised that the Multnomah County District Attorney's Office pursued criminal charges against his client and the others. All they were doing was holding signs and chanting loudly, he said.

"We're talking about political speech here," Freedman said. "... It's very difficult to criminalize it."

Freedman's client, Steven Eugene Kimes, and six co-defendants were charged with misdemeanor second-degree disorderly conduct under a subsection of the law that states that it's illegal to "disturb a lawful assembly of persons" with an intention of causing "public annoyance, inconvenience or alarm."

Freedman argued that the phrase "a lawful assembly" was overbroad, saying the term doesn't just apply to public meetings in front of a city council but any sort of gathering.

"It could be five people meeting on a street corner, talking about the weather -- and someone could 'disturb' them by wearing a Trump T-shirt or shouting 'Black Lives Matter!'" Freedman said.

Prosecutor Eamon McMahon contended in a memo to the court that the First Amendment didn't protect the defendants' behavior.

"While the First Amendment bars any law that abridges freedom of speech, it is not boundless, nor does it create a right for a person to communicate their views at all times in any manner that person desires," McMahon wrote, referring to a higher court opinion. "To that end, federal courts have held there is a significant governmental interest in conducting orderly, efficient meetings of public bodies."

Multnomah County Circuit Judge Gregory Silver agreed with the defense that the law is unconstitutional because it's overbroad.

The ruling is the latest hit to police and prosecution efforts to control unruly protesters at public meetings. In Portland, the District Attorney's Office has backed off criminal charges against 15 of 16 people arrested in City Hall protests since June:

Four protesters

On Oct. 5, two protesters who refused to leave a Portland City Council hearing after a larger group had ignored calls for order were arrested for trespassing, but the prosecution dropped charges. It's unclear if they still plan to pursue charges later.

On Oct. 12,

Hales told The Oregonian/OregonLive that his decision took into account their right to protest under the First Amendment. He noted that he didn't agree with the tactics, which led the city to shut down City Hall and prompted police to use pepper spray on protesters as officers were pelted with bottles and other objects.

But he said, "The best way to heal from the pain and unhappiness of that event ... is to say carrying on with criminal charges isn't in the best interests."

The District Attorney's Office didn't get a similar request from Gresham's mayor or City Council about the seven arrested for chanting. Mayor Shane Bemis was scheduled to testify before last week's trial was canceled.

Jenna Plank, the deputy district attorney who oversees the misdemeanor unit of the prosecutor's office, said her office knows the First Amendment well. Each decision whether to pursue a case is made by reviewing the specific facts of each incident.

"It's a delicate balance to strike in terms of what conduct is allowable under the law and what conduct isn't allowable under the law," Plank said. "Truly, we are just very careful at reviewing all of these cases."

Kirsten Snowden, chief deputy district attorney, said she doesn't know yet if her office will appeal the judge's ruling that the Gresham group couldn't be prosecuted under that part of the second-degree disorderly conduct law.

Snowden said city officials have another mechanism to stop insistent and unruly protesters at a public meeting: It could exclude them from the building for a period of time. And if they come back, police can arrest them for criminal trespass.

-- Aimee Green

503-294-5119