In January 1981, Kroll filed the present action in federal district court. He claimed, among other things, that five named Capitol Police officers had violated his First Amendment rights and requested compensatory damages in the amount of $100,000 and punitive damages in the same amount.
On cross-motions for summary judgment, the District Court concluded that “[l]iability ... turns solely upon whether plaintiff's First Amendment rights were violated. There is no good faith or reasonableness defense.”
590 F.Supp. at 1295–96. On the constitutional question, the court concluded: “Since plaintiff was unlawfully arrested while exercising First Amendment rights, he is entitled to recover damages.”
Id. at 1296. The trial court determined that Mr. Kroll's conduct did not constitute a “demonstration” within the meaning of the applicable permit regulations.
In addition, the court held that the regulations were wrongfully applied to Mr. Kroll, in that he was singled out solely by virtue of the content of his message. In sum, since plaintiff did not interfere with the ceremony, “[t]he traffic regulations should not have been construed to apply to plaintiff's conduct, as such application did not comport with their intent.”
Id. at 1292.