In a recent development, the Supreme Court has decided to allow a lawsuit to proceed against a Black Lives Matter activist, DeRay Mckesson, who led a protest in Louisiana in 2016 where a police officer was injured. This decision has sparked concerns among civil rights groups and free speech advocates, who argue that this lawsuit could potentially threaten the right to protest.

The lawsuit in question originated from a protest organized by Mckesson in Baton Rouge, following the police killing of a Black man. During the demonstration, an unidentified protester allegedly threw a "rock-like" object that hit a police officer, identified as John Doe in court papers. The injured officer subsequently sued Mckesson for his role as the protest organizer.

Initially, a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit in 2017, but the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that the officer should be able to argue that Mckesson did not exercise reasonable care in leading protesters onto a highway, thereby setting up a confrontation with the police that resulted in the officer's injury.

While the Supreme Court did not provide an explanation for its decision, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a brief opinion cautioning lower courts not to read too much into it. She clarified that the court's denial does not express any view on the merits of Mckesson's claim.

This legal battle has raised concerns regarding the impact it may have on the right to protest. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), representing Mckesson, argued that if the lawsuit were allowed to proceed, it would discourage individuals from exercising their rights to protest for fear of personal liability for the actions of others.

On the other hand, lawyers representing the injured officer urged the court to reject Mckesson's appeal, highlighting that the protest had illegally blocked the highway and asserting that Mckesson failed to intervene and prevent the violence that unfolded.

It remains to be seen how this case will unfold and what implications it will have for future protests and the protection of free speech. As the legal battle continues, advocates, civil rights groups, and free speech supporters will closely monitor the amicus of the court and its potential impact on the constitutional right to protest.