Those Crazy Jefferson Dancers

Jason Kuznicki on Apr 14th 2008

You’ve probably already seen the YouTube videos. If not, Julian Sanchez is the source to start with:

…a friend—whose name I’ll omit for the moment — just got arrested at a little dance party some libertarians were holding at the Jefferson Memorial (which, apparently, is open to the public 24/7). I’m not entirely clear on what the charge could have been — I wasn’t aware dancing at a public monument was prohibited by any statute — but given that my friend’s immediate social circle is largely composed of journalists, bloggers, and constitutional lawyers who sue the government for fun, I predict hilarity. The purpose of the dance party, ironically, was to celebrate Thomas Jefferson’s birthday.

Yes, yes. And they captured the arrest on video, too. The participants were all wearing iPods, so noise wasn’t a factor. Reports have it that — am I allowed to mention her name yet? — was sober when she was arrested, too.

It’s a little late for this year’s, but let me suggest nominating the incident for next year’s Muzzle Awards. Via Eyeteeth, the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression brings us this year’s winners. The current crop isn’t bad as outrages go, but I have to say that it would be hard to beat the irony factor of being arrested at the Jefferson Memorial.

Filed in The Bench, The Bistro

One Response to “Those Crazy Jefferson Dancers”

  1. # Ahcuahon 16 Apr 2008 at 6:04 pm

    The Washington Post has a story about it today, here.

    In it, Peter Onuf, Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation professor of history at U-Va, is quoted as saying:

    “What they’re referring to here is Jefferson’s endorsement of popular resistance to tyrannical authority,” he said yesterday. “What these folks were involved in was provoking authorities into having to enforce the law. Jefferson was very anal about obedience to the law.

    “It trivializes Jefferson to suggest that in his name or spirit someone would ignore the will of the people as expressed in law,” Onuf said. “I don’t think he’d bother to turn over in his grave in this case.”

    Now, aside from the fact that no permit was required, and that she was charged with “Interfering with an agency function” (36 USC 2.32), which really doesn’t seem to apply to what was happening, I have no recollection of Jefferson being anal the way Prof. Onuf says. Now, adimittedly, I’m not a Jefferson scholar, only having read Dumas Malone’s bio, and The Adams-Jefferson Letters. (And other snippets I’ve picked up here and there).

    Jason, you’ve clearly done extensive reading and research on Jefferson. Am I missing something? Or is Prof. Onuf reaching?

Trackback URI |