Mass. high court hears whether resisting-arrest law shields protected protest and whether evidence supported juvenile convictions

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on Monday heard arguments about whether the state's resisting-arrest statute can be read to protect clearly protected First Amendment activity and whether the evidence was sufficient to support convictions of several juveniles who filmed or protested officers during a street confrontation.

At issue was how the statute's "color of law" element and the two-prong resisting definition should be interpreted when the alleged conduct occurred amid what counsel described as a chaotic scene of students in the street. Counsel for one juvenile argued that including a First Amendment protection within the color-of-law element is necessary to prevent police from "quell[ing] criticism, punish[ing] disrespect, and avoid[ing] civil liability," and that the Commonwealth could not meet its burden if the defendant was exercising clearly protected speech.

The question matters because the court must decide whether acts such as shouting at officers, filming them while standing near an arrest, or turning away when an officer attempts to place a hand behind a back amount to the criminal conduct the statute criminalizes. "By including the color of law element in the resisting arrest statute, the legislature provided a limit on police…