Hint: If you use Snowden as an example you automatically forfeit your right to participate in any reasonable discussion on the matter.
https://www.google.com/search?q=free+speech+arrest
I'd also argue that having speech consigned to these places[1] when the whole country is supposedly a free speech zone doesn't follow the spirit of the 1st Amendment. Also if they setup a free speech zone and you don't use it then you can be arrested for that
Obviously you can't be charged for "exercising free speech rights" since that isn't a crime, the charge is always something else like "disturbing the peace" or "resisting arrest" or some other trumped up nonsense.
It is required by law to acquire a permit before protesting. This is very easy to do, everyone has permits for the July 4th protest already. The government has not historically blocked protest permit requests
Also, kind of ridiculous that you need a permit to protest.
Take off the tinfoil for a moment and think rationally. What happens during a protest? Often, huge masses of people gather in a single public area (a street, a park, a government building, etc). While protesters are generally well-intentioned, wherever there are large gatherings of people, there are criminally-minded folk who seek to exploit this via looting, theft, assault, and other wonderful things that the dregs of humanity like to perform. Additionally, it often gums up public works, traffic, etc. It's important that the police (yes, most police officers are just middle class folks like us that are interested in preserving general peace) be aware of these types of things so that they can provide protection for both the protesters and the citizens of the city.
[0]http://books.google.com/books?id=8_HWOTtdsMUC&pg=RA1-PA126&l...
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/police-arrestin...
Jared Marcum was arrested in school for wearing an NRA T-Shirt.
The Bank of America graffitist was arrested for using sidewalk chalk.
Occupy protestors in Nashville were arrested, and a judge later proclaimed that their arrests were a violation of their freedom of speech rights.
I watched a video yesterday in which a dog was shot because the dog's owner was recording the police on his cell phone.
Cameron D'Ambrosia was arrested for posting lyrics to a rap song on Facebook.
Or the Irvine 11, who were convicted (thankfully of pretty minor sentences) for protesting a speech?
Or Walter Bagdasarian, who said that somebody ought to "shoot the nigger" (referring to Obama) who spent years in prison before being released on a circuit court appeal?
In short, the 'successful charge' does add height to the hurdle, but the rampant arresting of people for their exercise of free speech is a problem, whether or not it results in a conviction. For many Americans, a week spent in jail, later to be released, is a very big problem; both from the result of lowered reputation as well as the financial impact.
Walter Bagdasarian not only exhorted readers of a public message board to 'shoot the nig [sic],' he also sent emails containing text such as "Pistol??? Dude, Josh needs to get us one of these, just shoot the nigga’s car and POOF!" with a link to a high-calibre rifle advertisement, among various other even more obnoxious statements. Bagdasarian happened to own a .50 cal rifle at the time he was making predictions that "[Obama] He will have a 50 cal in the head soon."
I encourage you to read the full decision, as well as Wardlaw's dissent (with which I agree - Kosinski's reasoning seems strained, pendant as it is on other people being unaware of Bagdasian's ownership of the kind of gun whose use he was predicting) at http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/07/19/09... The government did not appeal the 9th Circuit decision, as far as I know.
Bagdasarian did not spend years in prison, or even go to jail. He was sentenced to time served (when he was detained prior to arraignment, after which he was freed on $100k bail), ordered to spend 60 days in a half-way house, undergo 2 years of supervised release, and fined $500. http://www.kpbs.org/news/2009/oct/26/no-prison-la-mesa-man-c...
I'm not sure why you chose this example, but you significantly mischaracterized his remarks and the penalty he suffered.
I don't think the Irvine 11 are are going to see their sentences overturned at appeal, as their protest took place in the context of a private event and they were convicted of disrupting it by repeatedly shouting the speaker down, rather than for the content of their criticism (which I thought was entirely reasonable).
I will look into the Terak Mehenna case, which I'm not familiar with but which comes up for appeal later this month.
I haven't read the full decision, so I will, and will likely be informed. I also don't claim superior legal knowledge, though I am studying for the bar, but that is despite not having a juris doctorate, so there are large gaps in my knowledge, especially in crim.
I could cite more examples, though perhaps the Mehenna case will be the best example of the ones cited anyway.
Regardless, thanks for the corrections. I'll look into them.
Believe it or not I'm more drawn to defense work.
I've been studying law for some time, but it only recently occurred to me that I should even attempt the bar, at some point in the future. A friend of mine keeps telling me I should blog about it, which I've agreed is a good idea to cement my findings, but I'm debating whether or not anyone would care about a random asshole trying to pass the bar enough to make the blog public.
Here's[1] some aggregated info on Mehanna, and also his wikipedia entry[2], and ACLU's[3] recap.
[1] - http://archive.recapthelaw.org/mad/119881/
Not an arrest, but pretty fucked up. You seem to lack a lot of historical context.